# Solar energy is dead



## mdn2000

Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.

Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert

http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf



> September 30, 2009
> Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a
> Need for Water
> By TODD WOODY





> AMARGOSA VALLEY, Nev.  In a rural corner of Nevada reeling from the recession,
> a bit of salvation seemed to arrive last year. A German developer, Solar Millennium,
> announced plans to build two large solar farms here that would harness the sun to
> generate electricity, creating hundreds of jobs.
> But then things got messy. The company revealed that its preferred method of cooling the
> power plants would consume 1.3 billion gallons of water a year, about 20 percent of this
> desert valleys available water.





> In California, solar developers have already been forced to switch to less water-intensive
> technologies when local officials have refused to turn on the tap. Other big solar projects
> are mired in disputes with state regulators over water consumption.
> To date, the flashpoint for such conflicts has been the Southwest, where dozens of
> multibillion-dollar solar power plants are planned for thousands of acres of desert.



I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water. 

Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.

Solar energy is dead.


----------



## edthecynic

mdn2000 said:


> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> September 30, 2009
> Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a
> Need for Water
> By TODD WOODY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMARGOSA VALLEY, Nev.  In a rural corner of Nevada reeling from the recession,
> a bit of salvation seemed to arrive last year. A German developer, Solar Millennium,
> announced plans to build two large solar farms here that would harness the sun to
> generate electricity, creating hundreds of jobs.
> But then things got messy. The company revealed that its preferred method of cooling the
> power plants would consume 1.3 billion gallons of water a year, about 20 percent of this
> desert valleys available water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, solar developers have already been forced to switch to less water-intensive
> technologies when local officials have refused to turn on the tap. Other big solar projects
> are mired in disputes with state regulators over water consumption.
> To date, the flashpoint for such conflicts has been the Southwest, where dozens of
> multibillion-dollar solar power plants are planned for thousands of acres of desert.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
Click to expand...

Not hardly. 

All that means is the SRECs will increase in price which will shorten the break even point for home owners who mount solar systems on their roof.

Go solar!


----------



## Big Fitz

Industrial scale solar is dead for another 40-75 years.  Till the technology is improved to greater efficiency to compete with real power sources like Nuclear, Hydro and Coal.

You will never know for true how good it really is till they lose all subsidies.

BUT...

As a supplemental power supply for residential and light commercial and possibly light industrial (offices with small machinery) it's a great bonus to have.  Slap those on the roofs of warehouses office buildings and houses, and it's a nice supplement.


----------



## Oddball

The hell you say?!?!?

You meant that them "green technology" thingies, that were supposed to be the panacea for all the world's energy needs, have unforeseen negative externalities?!?!?

Well, I'll be dipped!


----------



## Big Black Dog

Solar energy dead?  What?  The sun is going to quit shining or something?


----------



## mdn2000

Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.

On the top of your house, still need to clean it. 

Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.

No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.

Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?

On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.

What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.


----------



## Big Fitz

mdn2000 said:


> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.


Ummm... Although I am no fan of green alternatives as they currently sit, I think you're pushing the water angle too hard.  Piezoelectric cells require no water.  Yes efficiency goes down if they are not kept clean, but... as much as you're saying?  I'm finding it hard to believe.  

It comes down to efficiency of solar energy extraction.  The technology is not there and won't be up to snuff for another 40-75 years.  You may make good supplemental energy is all.  Nothing to base a power grid on, but can take the edge off your energy costs that will be worth it's while once you get government out of the way and let the free market do it's job on this technology.


----------



## edthecynic

mdn2000 said:


> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.


Waterless cleaning brush.
HowStuffWorks Videos "Living With Ed: Bill's Solar Brush"

Minimal water cleaning system
Kit Solar Panel Cleaning 7-12ft MrLongar - 1009


----------



## mdn2000

Big Fitz said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.
> 
> 
> 
> Ummm... Although I am no fan of green alternatives as they currently sit, I think you're pushing the water angle too hard.  Piezoelectric cells require no water.  Yes efficiency goes down if they are not kept clean, but... as much as you're saying?  I'm finding it hard to believe.
> 
> It comes down to efficiency of solar energy extraction.  The technology is not there and won't be up to snuff for another 40-75 years.  You may make good supplemental energy is all.  Nothing to base a power grid on, but can take the edge off your energy costs that will be worth it's while once you get government out of the way and let the free market do it's job on this technology.
Click to expand...


Green energy, renewable energy, does not exist, every form uses fossil fuels, large amounts of fossil fuels.

I guess if the technology wont be there for 40-75 years when should I check for your next post.


----------



## Revere

Green energy is the "flat earth" of our time. 

The only way it works is if government imposes shortages by making you too poor to afford more than the limited quantities it is capable of producing.


----------



## mdn2000

edthecynic said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.
> 
> 
> 
> Waterless cleaning brush.
> HowStuffWorks Videos "Living With Ed: Bill's Solar Brush"
> 
> Minimal water cleaning system
> Kit Solar Panel Cleaning 7-12ft MrLongar - 1009
Click to expand...


Without checking the links you have admitted water is needed. 

Now we get to argue about how much.

You can use a waterless brush all you want, but eventually you will need water and chemicals to clean your panels. 

Lots of labor involved cleaning solar panels on a roof, ladders, scaffolding, so every panel will be cleaned. 

Water will have to be used, chemicals even better but too expensive.

In Los Angeles think lots of smog, much of Orange county, smog, Riverside county, some of the worst smog in the country, Palm Springs the same problem.

Commercial and Residential Solar panels on a large scale would be an environmental disaster.

The water impact for even the best scenario cleaning solution is unsustainable, impossible.


----------



## edthecynic

mdn2000 said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.
> 
> 
> 
> *Waterless* cleaning brush.
> HowStuffWorks Videos "Living With Ed: Bill's Solar Brush"
> 
> Minimal water cleaning system
> Kit Solar Panel Cleaning 7-12ft MrLongar - 1009
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Without checking the links you have admitted water is needed. *
> 
> Now we get to argue about how much.
> 
> You can use a waterless brush all you want, but eventually you will need water and chemicals to clean your panels.
> 
> Lots of labor involved cleaning solar panels on a roof, ladders, scaffolding, so every panel will be cleaned.
> 
> Water will have to be used, chemicals even better but too expensive.
> 
> In Los Angeles think lots of smog, much of Orange county, smog, Riverside county, some of the worst smog in the country, Palm Springs the same problem.
> 
> Commercial and Residential Solar panels on a large scale would be an environmental disaster.
> 
> The water impact for even the best scenario cleaning solution is unsustainable, impossible.
Click to expand...

A minimal amount of water is needed ONCE a year.


----------



## Big Fitz

mdn2000 said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.
> 
> 
> 
> Ummm... Although I am no fan of green alternatives as they currently sit, I think you're pushing the water angle too hard.  Piezoelectric cells require no water.  Yes efficiency goes down if they are not kept clean, but... as much as you're saying?  I'm finding it hard to believe.
> 
> It comes down to efficiency of solar energy extraction.  The technology is not there and won't be up to snuff for another 40-75 years.  You may make good supplemental energy is all.  Nothing to base a power grid on, but can take the edge off your energy costs that will be worth it's while once you get government out of the way and let the free market do it's job on this technology.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Green energy, renewable energy, does not exist, every form uses fossil fuels, large amounts of fossil fuels.
> 
> I guess if the technology wont be there for 40-75 years when should I check for your next post.
Click to expand...

No need to get snarky, I'm just saying that Solar is not dead, it's just not up to prime time.  The energy extraction ratio of solar is for shit.  I know that.  But it is still good for some small scale things.    It's that we are wasting incredible amounts of money on a technology that is 2 generations away from being viable.  I'd rather see that money sunk into building nuke plants and expanding our ability to refine oil and other petroleum sources cheaply and quickly.  We're at least 200 years away from running critically low on oil, and by then, we will definitely have another, preferable power source.

On a freak occurance, I have to agree with Ed for once.  Lightning does strike it seems.  There are other ways to clean and that's the beauty of the free market and capitalism.  If something comes along that is bigger, better, faster, stronger, cheaper, more efficient... the market WILL throw trillions behind it and move on.  Capitalism and innovation even works for this tech.  Only if you don't fuck with the process.


----------



## Revere

mdn2000 said:


> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.
> 
> 
> 
> Waterless cleaning brush.
> HowStuffWorks Videos "Living With Ed: Bill's Solar Brush"
> 
> Minimal water cleaning system
> Kit Solar Panel Cleaning 7-12ft MrLongar - 1009
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Without checking the links you have admitted water is needed.
> 
> Now we get to argue about how much.
> 
> You can use a waterless brush all you want, but eventually you will need water and chemicals to clean your panels.
> 
> Lots of labor involved cleaning solar panels on a roof, ladders, scaffolding, so every panel will be cleaned.
> 
> Water will have to be used, chemicals even better but too expensive.
> 
> In Los Angeles think lots of smog, much of Orange county, smog, Riverside county, some of the worst smog in the country, Palm Springs the same problem.
> 
> Commercial and Residential Solar panels on a large scale would be an environmental disaster.
> 
> The water impact for even the best scenario cleaning solution is unsustainable, impossible.
Click to expand...


There is no way you could get away with cleaning those panels in the areas you mention only once per year.


----------



## Big Fitz

Revere said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edthecynic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Waterless cleaning brush.
> HowStuffWorks Videos "Living With Ed: Bill's Solar Brush"
> 
> Minimal water cleaning system
> Kit Solar Panel Cleaning 7-12ft MrLongar - 1009
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without checking the links you have admitted water is needed.
> 
> Now we get to argue about how much.
> 
> You can use a waterless brush all you want, but eventually you will need water and chemicals to clean your panels.
> 
> Lots of labor involved cleaning solar panels on a roof, ladders, scaffolding, so every panel will be cleaned.
> 
> Water will have to be used, chemicals even better but too expensive.
> 
> In Los Angeles think lots of smog, much of Orange county, smog, Riverside county, some of the worst smog in the country, Palm Springs the same problem.
> 
> Commercial and Residential Solar panels on a large scale would be an environmental disaster.
> 
> The water impact for even the best scenario cleaning solution is unsustainable, impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no way you could get away with cleaning those panels in the areas you mention only once per year.
Click to expand...

Very very true.  I will say this I guess.  I have more faith in our ability to invent and achieve solutions when we put our minds to it due to necessity.

Mother necessity... where would we be?


----------



## Toro

Famous last words. 

Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.


----------



## mdn2000

Big Fitz said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ummm... Although I am no fan of green alternatives as they currently sit, I think you're pushing the water angle too hard.  Piezoelectric cells require no water.  Yes efficiency goes down if they are not kept clean, but... as much as you're saying?  I'm finding it hard to believe.
> 
> It comes down to efficiency of solar energy extraction.  The technology is not there and won't be up to snuff for another 40-75 years.  You may make good supplemental energy is all.  Nothing to base a power grid on, but can take the edge off your energy costs that will be worth it's while once you get government out of the way and let the free market do it's job on this technology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Green energy, renewable energy, does not exist, every form uses fossil fuels, large amounts of fossil fuels.
> 
> I guess if the technology wont be there for 40-75 years when should I check for your next post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No need to get snarky, I'm just saying that Solar is not dead, it's just not up to prime time.  The energy extraction ratio of solar is for shit.  I know that.  But it is still good for some small scale things.
> 
> On a freak occurance, I have to agree with Ed for once.  Lightning does strike it seems.  There are other ways to clean and that's the beauty of the free market and capitalism.  If something comes along that is bigger, better, faster, stronger, cheaper, more efficient... the market WILL throw trillions behind it and move on.
Click to expand...


That is not snarky, its funny, I could not add "lol", that would of taken away the shock value when you read it and thus denied me the pleasure of your response.  It was a joke in good humor, I intended the humor to be a bit dry.

I have specifically posted in opposition to the idea of Green, Renewable energy, these things are obviously being pushed onto us through law, power, and greed. There are major obstacles which most people are obviously not aware of.

Water for Solar is one problem which happens to be a permanent obstacle.

Solar on a small scale is not Green or Renewable energy, it never will be.

Politicians and government officials from washington to my small town are getting paid off, are passing laws and regulations mandating forms of power without even understanding they dont work.

Is California going to shove green energy down our throats no matter what the cost is.

The state of California is bankrupt, we are now a welfare state, we must import electricity to meet our need, the federal government is giving us billions, we are borrowing billions, this money pays the universities to produce the reports the USA Today gets to use for free, a report that is propaganda. The money goes to the California Air Research Board, the money goes to officials and bureaucrats, billions of dollars, and it is still not enough.

It has just begun. 

California has collapsed, we are bankrupt. 

We will have to see if the new governor addresses the problem or continuous to hide the problem like our current governor.


----------



## mdn2000

Toro said:


> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.



Its not a bet, Solar is dead in its tracks. 

There is no water for solar. 

Silicon Valley's history is a history of losing hundreds of billions in stocks. This is the bet, a pretty stupid one at that.

Silicon Valley also has a huge pollution problem which green technologies are creating. 

Silicon Valley will help drag California under, but wait, is not the Obama administration pumping billions of dollars into Green energy.

I know they are loans, but what if these companies collapse, they are too important to fail, our future depends on Obama bailing out Silicon Valley and California.

Isnt that where all the bad rich people live and invest, California, rich politicians, rich corporations in silicon valley producing green energy.


----------



## Revere

Toro said:


> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.



That not exactly how ROI works.


----------



## eagleseven

I love saying the word _piezoelectric._

*Piezoelectric! Piezoelectric!*


----------



## Big Fitz

E7....



Behave.


----------



## Toro

Revere said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That not exactly how ROI works.
Click to expand...


we deal a lot with Silicon Valley and their ROI


----------



## rdean

The ultimate step in utilizing solar power is to convert maximum energy from sun into electricity. This will make solar power highly cost-advantageous compared to other traditional power sources. *Capturing energy wasted as heat* from the sun can *increase solar conversion efficiency greatly*. Research funded by the U.S. Department of Energy is on-going to make this happen.

Energy Inventions - Innovative energy production concepts

This kind of research will take money.  Republicans call that "pork".  If they support paved roads being turned into gravel roads, will they really put money into education and research?  Let's all give education a "Sarah Palin" eye roll.


----------



## Revere

Toro said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That not exactly how ROI works.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> we deal a lot with Silicon Valley and their ROI
Click to expand...


Really?  Do you ask them, "When will this make money?"  And then do they say, "Beats me!"


----------



## Revere

Entrepreneurs, not the US Department of Energy, will make viable solar solutions, if they exist.

The Federal government should not be picking winners and losers in techology.


----------



## uscitizen

Green energy works, just replace a bulldozer with 100 men with shovels!

Luddites RULE!


----------



## rdean

Revere said:


> Entrepreneurs, not the US Department of Energy, will make viable solar solutions, if they exist.
> 
> The Federal government should not be picking winners and losers in techology.



Entrepreneurs take research and turn it into money.  But seriously, how much research is actually done by Entrepreneurs?  Do you know what it takes to do research?  The time?  The resources?  The expense?

How much of our technology came from NASA?  They are hardly "Entrepreneurs".


----------



## JiggsCasey

Now be honest and tell the forum how much water is used for oil shale and tar sands. It dwarfs the amount alleged in your faux concern above, OP.

Just what IS with the boner you guys have for ever-dirtier hydro-carbon energy? You'll learn soon enough just what's at play here.

Shhhh

ASPO-USA: Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas


----------



## JiggsCasey

Revere said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That not exactly how ROI works.
Click to expand...


This from the camp that never factors in the full costs of fossil fuel extraction, including environmental damage, when figuring out honest EROEI for oil, gas and coal.


----------



## uscitizen

I guess it will be a real long cold night?


----------



## Revere

rdean said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> Entrepreneurs, not the US Department of Energy, will make viable solar solutions, if they exist.
> 
> The Federal government should not be picking winners and losers in techology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Entrepreneurs take research and turn it into money.  But seriously, how much research is actually done by Entrepreneurs?  Do you know what it takes to do research?  The time?  The resources?  The expense?
> 
> How much of our technology came from NASA?  They are hardly "Entrepreneurs".
Click to expand...


NASA is being tossed aside by the Obama regime.  They're not going to be doing anything but watching the weather before long.

All consumer electronics and most pharmeceuticals are privately researched, for one.


----------



## Flopper

*All large scale power generating plants require huge amounts of water.  I would say any power generating plants except for hydro would face this problem in the southwest.  This of course is one the advantages of wind power.

Water used in power plants for cooling is not actually consumed.  True some of the water is lost to evaporation but much of the water can be returned to it's source for other uses.  I think there is a lot  more to this story than what's reported in this thread.
*


----------



## rdean

Revere said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> Entrepreneurs, not the US Department of Energy, will make viable solar solutions, if they exist.
> 
> The Federal government should not be picking winners and losers in techology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Entrepreneurs take research and turn it into money.  But seriously, how much research is actually done by Entrepreneurs?  Do you know what it takes to do research?  The time?  The resources?  The expense?
> 
> How much of our technology came from NASA?  They are hardly "Entrepreneurs".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NASA is being tossed aside by the Obama regime.  They're not going to be doing anything but watching the weather before long.
> 
> All consumer electronics and most pharmeceuticals are privately researched, for one.
Click to expand...


NASA's Administrator Charles Bolden told reporters: "Our nation's leaders have come together and endorsed a blueprint for Nasa, one that requires us to think and act boldly as we move our agency into the future. This legislation supports the president's ambitious plan for Nasa to pioneer new frontiers of innovation and discovery."
The act will mark a sea change in the way Nasa does some of its business, particularly in the realm of human spaceflight. 
The legislation calls for $1.3bn to be allocated to the development of commercial crew services over the next three years.
The money will seed private companies to design and build rockets and capsules capable of delivering astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS).

Tell-It-Like-It-Is: Obama signs Nasa up to new future

You see, the Bush plan was to return to the moon using existing technology.  From there we could.  Well, what was it we could do?  That was the problem.  Bush's plan, incomplete and poorly thought out seemed more like a "stunt" than a "plan". 

Bush and the Republicans aren't very much into science,  but they do like bravado.

I get tired of you guys making charges with no evidence.  Why do you guys do that?  And then get mad at me?  I don't get it.


----------



## Revere

NASA isn't going to be throwing off any technology anymore that it hasn't had for 20 years, or wasn't co-developed for the military.

Press releases from government aren't research.


----------



## Flopper

mdn2000 said:


> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> September 30, 2009
> Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a
> Need for Water
> By TODD WOODY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMARGOSA VALLEY, Nev.  In a rural corner of Nevada reeling from the recession,
> a bit of salvation seemed to arrive last year. A German developer, Solar Millennium,
> announced plans to build two large solar farms here that would harness the sun to
> generate electricity, creating hundreds of jobs.
> But then things got messy. The company revealed that its preferred method of cooling the
> power plants would consume 1.3 billion gallons of water a year, about 20 percent of this
> desert valleys available water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, solar developers have already been forced to switch to less water-intensive
> technologies when local officials have refused to turn on the tap. Other big solar projects
> are mired in disputes with state regulators over water consumption.
> To date, the flashpoint for such conflicts has been the Southwest, where dozens of
> multibillion-dollar solar power plants are planned for thousands of acres of desert.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
Click to expand...

*Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.  

Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.

Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
*


----------



## Revere

Flopper said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> September 30, 2009
> Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a
> Need for Water
> By TODD WOODY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, solar developers have already been forced to switch to less water-intensive
> technologies when local officials have refused to turn on the tap. Other big solar projects
> are mired in disputes with state regulators over water consumption.
> To date, the flashpoint for such conflicts has been the Southwest, where dozens of
> multibillion-dollar solar power plants are planned for thousands of acres of desert.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.
> 
> Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.
> 
> Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
> Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
> *
Click to expand...


Change = gaming the fossil fuels market with taxes to make solar cost effective?


----------



## Toro

Revere said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> That not exactly how ROI works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we deal a lot with Silicon Valley and their ROI
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  Do you ask them, "When will this make money?"  And then do they say, "Beats me!"
Click to expand...


No that's not what they say.


----------



## rdean

Revere said:


> NASA isn't going to be throwing off any technology anymore that it hasn't had for 20 years, or wasn't co-developed for the military.
> 
> Press releases from government aren't research.



I don't know.  I went to White Sands for two weeks.  The company I worked for signed a contract with NASO to work on a Cone Calorimeter which is used to verify that materials in an O2 enriched environment aren't flammable.  They had astronauts die because of a fire that occurred with O2 enrichment.  There are two problems with a fire in such an environment.  Once it gets started, it's difficult to put out and second are the toxic gases found in the effluence.

Everyone that goes there has to sign an agreement that they won't talk about what they've been shown.  But I can tell you this, put a lot a brilliant scientists out in the desert and they are thrilled to show anyone that shows up what they are working on, even a lowly engineer like me.  I spent a week working and a week touring.  They would just come and get you.   It's not like you would want to say no and not everything is "secret". 

Funny, there are two rovers on Mars that have been operating for years.  Not bad for people who aren't developing any "technology", wouldn't you say?

NASA - Budget Documents, Strategic Plans and Performance Reports


----------



## mdn2000

rdean said:


> The ultimate step in utilizing solar power is to convert maximum energy from sun into electricity. This will make solar power highly cost-advantageous compared to other traditional power sources. *Capturing energy wasted as heat* from the sun can *increase solar conversion efficiency greatly*. Research funded by the U.S. Department of Energy is on-going to make this happen.
> 
> Energy Inventions - Innovative energy production concepts
> 
> This kind of research will take money.  Republicans call that "pork".  If they support paved roads being turned into gravel roads, will they really put money into education and research?  Let's all give education a "Sarah Palin" eye roll.



You linked an advertisement, my money stolen to give to others to research the solar solution that does not exist. 

So far the lowest amount of time thus far posted is this will take at least 40 years, so we spend billions of dollars, force the people to give billions of dollars on ideas that we dont have water for.


----------



## Revere

rdean said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> NASA isn't going to be throwing off any technology anymore that it hasn't had for 20 years, or wasn't co-developed for the military.
> 
> Press releases from government aren't research.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know.  I went to White Sands for two weeks.  The company I worked for signed a contract with NASO to work on a Cone Calorimeter which is used to verify that materials in an O2 enriched environment aren't flammable.  They had astronauts die because of a fire that occurred with O2 enrichment.  There are two problems with a fire in such an environment.  Once it gets started, it's difficult to put out and second are the toxic gases found in the effluence.
> 
> Everyone that goes there has to sign an agreement that they won't talk about what they've been shown.  But I can tell you this, put a lot a brilliant scientists out in the desert and they are thrilled to show anyone that shows up what they are working on, even a lowly engineer like me.  I spent a week working and a week touring.  They would just come and get you.   It's not like you would want to say no and not everything is "secret".
> 
> Funny, there are two rovers on Mars that have been operating for years.  Not bad for people who aren't developing any "technology", wouldn't you say?
> 
> NASA - Budget Documents, Strategic Plans and Performance Reports
Click to expand...


I like guns and rockets and extraterrestrial rovers, but that's not technology with any consumer throwoff.

Google stands a better chance of delivering energy and technology solutions consumers will accept.


----------



## mdn2000

JiggsCasey said:


> Now be honest and tell the forum how much water is used for oil shale and tar sands. It dwarfs the amount alleged in your faux concern above, OP.
> 
> Just what IS with the boner you guys have for ever-dirtier hydro-carbon energy? You'll learn soon enough just what's at play here.
> 
> Shhhh
> 
> ASPO-USA: Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas



My point made again, you have to use fossil fuels, no choice, Solar energy needs fossil fuel to manufacturer the panels, so you are going to burn more fossil fuels to make the millions of square miles of panels you propose, that creates more demand for water.

Water as everyone knows is scarce in the desert, there is a drought in California and Arizona. 

Burn fossil fuels to make solar panels to make electricity, its best just to use the electricity from fossil fuels to power industry and homes. It is less wasteful.

How come every agency posted, every study, is all funded with tax money. My money.


----------



## mdn2000

JiggsCasey said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That not exactly how ROI works.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This from the camp that never factors in the full costs of fossil fuel extraction, including environmental damage, when figuring out honest EROEI for oil, gas and coal.
Click to expand...


This damage is greater when you have to use fossil fuel to manufacturer a weak source of power such as solar. 

Why are you not factoring this fact into Solar research and Solar panel manufacturer.


----------



## rdean

Revere said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> NASA isn't going to be throwing off any technology anymore that it hasn't had for 20 years, or wasn't co-developed for the military.
> 
> Press releases from government aren't research.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know.  I went to White Sands for two weeks.  The company I worked for signed a contract with NASO to work on a Cone Calorimeter which is used to verify that materials in an O2 enriched environment aren't flammable.  They had astronauts die because of a fire that occurred with O2 enrichment.  There are two problems with a fire in such an environment.  Once it gets started, it's difficult to put out and second are the toxic gases found in the effluence.
> 
> Everyone that goes there has to sign an agreement that they won't talk about what they've been shown.  But I can tell you this, put a lot a brilliant scientists out in the desert and they are thrilled to show anyone that shows up what they are working on, even a lowly engineer like me.  I spent a week working and a week touring.  They would just come and get you.   It's not like you would want to say no and not everything is "secret".
> 
> Funny, there are two rovers on Mars that have been operating for years.  Not bad for people who aren't developing any "technology", wouldn't you say?
> 
> NASA - Budget Documents, Strategic Plans and Performance Reports
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I like guns and rockets and extraterrestrial rovers, but that's not technology with any consumer throwoff.*
> Google stands a better chance of delivering energy and technology solutions consumers will accept.
Click to expand...


That's a joke, right?

The Space Place :: Inventions (Spinoffs) from Space

50 Consumer Technologies Developed by NASA in the Last 50 Years

http://gizmodo.com/5061120/50-consumer-technologies-developed-by-nasa-in-the-last-50-years


----------



## mdn2000

Flopper said:


> *All large scale power generating plants require huge amounts of water.  I would say any power generating plants except for hydro would face this problem in the southwest.  This of course is one the advantages of wind power.
> 
> Water used in power plants for cooling is not actually consumed.  True some of the water is lost to evaporation but much of the water can be returned to it's source for other uses.  I think there is a lot  more to this story than what's reported in this thread.
> *



Hydro uses the most water, that is why its called Hydro.

Water for Solar is not an idea or concern, its a reality, today we have no water for the Solar power plants. 

It is also not an advantage of wind power, you use massive amounts of fossil fuels to make fiberglass, that takes huge amounts of water. You think making weak inferior energy sources has no impact on the environment. The least you can do is think your idea through.


----------



## mdn2000

Flopper said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> September 30, 2009
> Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a
> Need for Water
> By TODD WOODY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, solar developers have already been forced to switch to less water-intensive
> technologies when local officials have refused to turn on the tap. Other big solar projects
> are mired in disputes with state regulators over water consumption.
> To date, the flashpoint for such conflicts has been the Southwest, where dozens of
> multibillion-dollar solar power plants are planned for thousands of acres of desert.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.
> 
> Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.
> 
> Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
> Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
> *
Click to expand...


Wikipedia, you got to be kidding, so you are learning as you go. 

Oil is needed for Solar panel manufacturer, you use the negative impact of fossil fuel as a reason Solar is better when Solar needs massive amounts of fossil fuel.

You could just as easily googled the negative impact of the solar energy plants in germany and spain.

Right now Germany and Spain are halting their Solar energy plans.

Spain's economy is real bad because of investment in Solar. Go ahead, use your google.

Your cut and paste is old, Germany and Spain are cutting the funds, stopping the use of solar.

and again, Solar is 100% dependent on fossil fuel, it can never end our "dependence" on energy, Solar uses more energy so it increases "dependence".


----------



## edthecynic

mdn2000 said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
> 
> 
> 
> *Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.
> 
> Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.
> 
> Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
> Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
> *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wikipedia, you got to be kidding, so you are learning as you go.
> 
> Oil is needed for Solar panel manufacturer, you use the negative impact of fossil fuel as a reason Solar is better when Solar needs massive amounts of fossil fuel.
> 
> You could just as easily googled the negative impact of the solar energy plants in germany and spain.
> 
> Right now Germany and Spain are halting their Solar energy plans.
> 
> Spain's economy is real bad because of investment in Solar. Go ahead, use your google.
> 
> Your cut and paste is old, Germany and Spain are cutting the funds, stopping the use of solar.
> 
> and again, Solar is 100% dependent on fossil fuel, it can never end our "dependence" on energy, Solar uses more energy so it increases "dependence".
Click to expand...

BioSolar Solar Panels - Solar Panels Made from Plants - The Daily Green

Plant-Based Solar Panels to Remove Oil from the Equation
BioSolar is producing components for solar panels made from plant-derived plastics.

BioSolar starts with recycled cotton and castor beans, and produces a protective backing for solar cells. Its product is intended as a competitor to Tedlar, a petroleum-derived film made by DuPont that is the industry standard for silicon-based solar cells. And it's 25% cheaper, too.

Oil Rig of the Future: A Solar Panel That Produces Oil: Scientific American

Oil Rig of the Future: A Solar Panel That Produces Oil
Researchers propose a novel approach to producing biofuel using diatoms

The researchers propose creating a biological solar panel, which will contain diatoms instead of photovoltaic cells. Diatoms would float about in a nutrient-rich water solution and produce oil when exposed to sunlight.

A Solar-Powered Oil Field? - NYTimes.com

BrightSource Energy has broken ground on a 29-megawatt solar steam plant at a Chevron oil field in Coalinga, Calif.

The 100-acre projects 7,000 mirrors will focus sunlight on a water-filled boiler that sits atop a 323-foot tower to produce hot, high-pressure steam.

In a conventional solar power plant, the steam drives a turbine to generate electricity. In this case, the steam will be injected into oil wells to enhance production by heating thick petroleum so it flows more freely. Oil companies typically rely on steam generated by natural gas or other fossil fuels to maximize oil recovery in places like the oil patch in Californias Fresno and Kern counties, where the petroleum is heavy and gooey.

My Brain Hurts &#8212; Solar Powered Oil Fields are Coming &#8211; CleanTechnica

Its a little hard to wrap your head around this one, but global oil giant Chevron (yes, that Chevron) has just announced plans to install a solar power system at the Kern River oil field in California.  This aint no small potatoes, either.  All together, Kern River is the fifth largest oil field in the U.S. and Chevrons solar array will consist of 7, 700 solar panels, according to Reuters.  The system is designed to generate 740 kilowatts of electricity to run Chevrons oil pumps and pipelines at the field.

The Kern River solar array is just one piece of a $2 billion investment Chevron plans for solar and alternative energy.  Thats a tidy little chunk of the oil companys change, which seems to indicate that the company sees the writing on the wall for fossil fuels.  Not that oil will disappear, just that the potential returns from solar power and other alternative energy in the retail market are starting to look mighty attractive.  Once again, follow the money

Chevron and Solar Power

The 8-acre Kern River site will serve as a test ground for seven different types of solar energy that could be deployed at Chevrons facilities worldwide, as detailed in a recent Los Angeles Times story.  Thats actually old news; according to the Times, Chevron started using solar at its facilities since 1992.

Chevron as a Solar Power Supplier

Chevron isnt only using solar to pump more fossil fuels.  Its also becoming a solar installer and supplier.  Last month the company announced that it is building a solar array in Mexico, on a 20-acre mine tailing site that it owns.  Solar energy from the installation will be sold to the local grid.  The  company is also building a 3.7 megawatt solar project in partnership with a school district in San Jose, California.  The company has become quite the solar expert and will do the project from soup to nuts, including designing, building, and operating it, as well as assessing its performance.  If Chevron gets out of the oil business it wont be any time soon, but its sure positioning itself to follow the money out of fossil fuels when the time comes.


----------



## Revere

If energy policy is left to government, you'll get the equivalent of the Trabant and the rotary phone.


----------



## Flopper

mdn2000 said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
> 
> 
> 
> *Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.
> 
> Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.
> 
> Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
> Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
> *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wikipedia, you got to be kidding, so you are learning as you go.
> 
> Oil is needed for Solar panel manufacturer, you use the negative impact of fossil fuel as a reason Solar is better when Solar needs massive amounts of fossil fuel.
> 
> You could just as easily googled the negative impact of the solar energy plants in germany and spain.
> 
> Right now Germany and Spain are halting their Solar energy plans.
> 
> Spain's economy is real bad because of investment in Solar. Go ahead, use your google.
> 
> Your cut and paste is old, Germany and Spain are cutting the funds, stopping the use of solar.
> 
> and again, Solar is 100% dependent on fossil fuel, it can never end our "dependence" on energy, Solar uses more energy so it increases "dependence".
Click to expand...

*Nope

The law, which both the German parliament and Chancellor Angela Merkel's cabinet are to consider in the coming weeks, would cut state-guaranteed prices by 15 percent for energy produced by solar panels on open ground.  It would also cut prices by 16 percent for solar panels on roofs, where 80 percent of solar panels in Germany are, and eliminate subsidies for panels placed on arable land. A previous plan by Environment Minister Norbert Roettgen was criticized for not going far enough.
"The objective is to reduce excessive stimulation without hindering an expansion of green energy."
Germany to cut subsidies for solar energy | Germany | Deutsche Welle | 23.02.2010

Spain is one of the most advanced countries in use of solar energy.  Just short of 3% of Spain's electric power comes from solar.  Considering the financial situation in Europe it is not surprising that Spain would cut back on subsidies. Solar power in Spain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a far cry from your ridiculous claim that they halted solar energy plans.

There is some truth in your claim that oil is used to manufacture solar panels but since the life of a solar is at least 20 to 25 years, the small amount of oil used in the manufacture is no consequence when you consider the amount of energy produced.  Panels using Castor beans and cottonseed oil are now coming on the market.
Miss Solar, Solar Panel, Photovoltaic, PV, Solar module, Solar Battery Charges, Solar Brick, Solar Lights
BioSolar Solar Panels - Solar Panels Made from Plants - The Daily Green

*


----------



## uscitizen

mdn2000 said:


> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now be honest and tell the forum how much water is used for oil shale and tar sands. It dwarfs the amount alleged in your faux concern above, OP.
> 
> Just what IS with the boner you guys have for ever-dirtier hydro-carbon energy? You'll learn soon enough just what's at play here.
> 
> Shhhh
> 
> ASPO-USA: Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My point made again, you have to use fossil fuels, no choice, Solar energy needs fossil fuel to manufacturer the panels, so you are going to burn more fossil fuels to make the millions of square miles of panels you propose, that creates more demand for water.
> 
> Water as everyone knows is scarce in the desert, there is a drought in California and Arizona.
> 
> Burn fossil fuels to make solar panels to make electricity, its best just to use the electricity from fossil fuels to power industry and homes. It is less wasteful.
> 
> How come every agency posted, every study, is all funded with tax money. My money.
Click to expand...


LOL, you do not pay nearly enough in taxes.  You might have bought the project a sheet of paper form your tax contribution, but I doubt even that much.


----------



## Revere

Nobody in this country is undertaxed.


----------



## Trajan

Toro said:


> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.



actually they are not going to go much further. In the thread I  created a few days ago, (search- 'solyndra') I have linked to an article which has commentary from the biggest VC grp. here in the valley. 

Included is a brief on the tech. involved,  we are not close, at all.


----------



## Trajan

edthecynic said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.
> 
> Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.
> 
> Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
> Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wikipedia, you got to be kidding, so you are learning as you go.
> 
> Oil is needed for Solar panel manufacturer, you use the negative impact of fossil fuel as a reason Solar is better when Solar needs massive amounts of fossil fuel.
> 
> You could just as easily googled the negative impact of the solar energy plants in germany and spain.
> 
> Right now Germany and Spain are halting their Solar energy plans.
> 
> Spain's economy is real bad because of investment in Solar. Go ahead, use your google.
> 
> Your cut and paste is old, Germany and Spain are cutting the funds, stopping the use of solar.
> 
> and again, Solar is 100% dependent on fossil fuel, it can never end our "dependence" on energy, Solar uses more energy so it increases "dependence".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BioSolar Solar Panels - Solar Panels Made from Plants - The Daily Green
> 
> Plant-Based Solar Panels to Remove Oil from the Equation
> BioSolar is producing components for solar panels made from plant-derived plastics.
> 
> BioSolar starts with recycled cotton and castor beans, and produces a protective backing for solar cells. Its product is intended as a competitor to Tedlar, a petroleum-derived film made by DuPont that is the industry standard for silicon-based solar cells. And it's 25% cheaper, too.
> 
> Oil Rig of the Future: A Solar Panel That Produces Oil: Scientific American
> 
> Oil Rig of the Future: A Solar Panel That Produces Oil
> Researchers propose a novel approach to producing biofuel using diatoms
> 
> The researchers propose creating a biological solar panel, which will contain diatoms instead of photovoltaic cells. Diatoms would float about in a nutrient-rich water solution and produce oil when exposed to sunlight.
> 
> A Solar-Powered Oil Field? - NYTimes.com
> 
> BrightSource Energy has broken ground on a 29-megawatt solar steam plant at a Chevron oil field in Coalinga, Calif.
> 
> The 100-acre projects 7,000 mirrors will focus sunlight on a water-filled boiler that sits atop a 323-foot tower to produce hot, high-pressure steam.
> 
> In a conventional solar power plant, the steam drives a turbine to generate electricity. In this case, the steam will be injected into oil wells to enhance production by heating thick petroleum so it flows more freely. Oil companies typically rely on steam generated by natural gas or other fossil fuels to maximize oil recovery in places like the oil patch in Californias Fresno and Kern counties, where the petroleum is heavy and gooey.
> 
> My Brain Hurts  Solar Powered Oil Fields are Coming  CleanTechnica
> 
> Its a little hard to wrap your head around this one, but global oil giant Chevron (yes, that Chevron) has just announced plans to install a solar power system at the Kern River oil field in California.  This aint no small potatoes, either.  All together, Kern River is the fifth largest oil field in the U.S. and Chevrons solar array will consist of 7, 700 solar panels, according to Reuters.  The system is designed to generate 740 kilowatts of electricity to run Chevrons oil pumps and pipelines at the field.
> 
> The Kern River solar array is just one piece of a $2 billion investment Chevron plans for solar and alternative energy.  Thats a tidy little chunk of the oil companys change, which seems to indicate that the company sees the writing on the wall for fossil fuels.  Not that oil will disappear, just that the potential returns from solar power and other alternative energy in the retail market are starting to look mighty attractive.  Once again, follow the money
> 
> Chevron and Solar Power
> 
> The 8-acre Kern River site will serve as a test ground for seven different types of solar energy that could be deployed at Chevrons facilities worldwide, as detailed in a recent Los Angeles Times story.  Thats actually old news; according to the Times, Chevron started using solar at its facilities since 1992.
> 
> Chevron as a Solar Power Supplier
> 
> Chevron isnt only using solar to pump more fossil fuels.  Its also becoming a solar installer and supplier.  Last month the company announced that it is building a solar array in Mexico, on a 20-acre mine tailing site that it owns.  Solar energy from the installation will be sold to the local grid.  The  company is also building a 3.7 megawatt solar project in partnership with a school district in San Jose, California.  The company has become quite the solar expert and will do the project from soup to nuts, including designing, building, and operating it, as well as assessing its performance.  If Chevron gets out of the oil business it wont be any time soon, but its sure positioning itself to follow the money out of fossil fuels when the time comes.
Click to expand...


how much energy nation wide on a corporate scale, do you think ( or does the articles if they do, state)  this will net out to as a savings, or that as a supplement,   taking up the slack and adding to what we use as compared to other sources now? 2%, 5%...10%?


Oh and when they actually get it up and running let me know, the last time they tried to get variances in California for the transmission lines necessary to carry the output to urban areas they got stopped cold.


----------



## Flopper

mdn2000 said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> *All large scale power generating plants require huge amounts of water.  I would say any power generating plants except for hydro would face this problem in the southwest.  This of course is one the advantages of wind power.
> 
> Water used in power plants for cooling is not actually consumed.  True some of the water is lost to evaporation but much of the water can be returned to it's source for other uses.  I think there is a lot  more to this story than what's reported in this thread.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hydro uses the most water, that is why its called Hydro.
> 
> Water for Solar is not an idea or concern, its a reality, today we have no water for the Solar power plants.
> 
> It is also not an advantage of wind power, you use massive amounts of fossil fuels to make fiberglass, that takes huge amounts of water. You think making weak inferior energy sources has no impact on the environment. The least you can do is think your idea through.
Click to expand...

*Again you are neglecting to consider the life of the wind turbine and it's energy output which far out ways the detrimental aspect of the petroleum used to manufacture it.  

A wind turbine typically lasts around 20-25 years. During this time, as with a car, some parts may need replacing.

The very first of the mass-produced turbines celebrated its 20th birthday in May 2000. The Vestas 30kW machine has operated steadily throughout its lifetime, with none of the major components needing to be replaced.  A wind turbine typically lasts around 20-25 years. During this time, as with a car, some parts may need replacing.

The very first of the mass-produced turbines celebrated its 20th birthday in May 2000. The Vestas 30kW machine has operated steadily throughout its lifetime, with none of the major components needing to be replaced.  Even after 25 years the most likely overhaul is the replacement of the power generator and bearings.  No, petroleum used in the manufacture is of little consequence when you consider the power produced and the life expectancy.   

RenewableUK - Frequently Asked Questions*


----------



## Toro

Trajan said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Famous last words.
> 
> Betting against green technologies is a bet against human and American ingenuity. Silicon Valley is pouring billions of dollars into green technologies. Don't know when they will become economically viable but economically viable they will become.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> actually they are not going to go much further. In the thread I  created a few days ago, (search- 'solyndra') I have linked to an article which has commentary from the biggest VC grp. here in the valley.
> 
> Included is a brief on the tech. involved,  we are not close, at all.
Click to expand...


Oh, I agree.  We are still some ways off.


----------



## edthecynic

Revere said:


> Nobody in this country is undertaxed.


Not according to your MessiahRushie! The truly wealthy pay no taxes and CON$ habitually complain that about 50% pay no income taxes.

August 7, 2007
CALLER:  And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and *the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income,* and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH:  It does,* exactly, and here's the dirty little secret* if you ever to pull it off.  It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business.  *You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income.*  I'm out of time.  I'll explain that. *There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income.  Earned income is what the income tax rate is on.  That's how "the rich" do it.  They don't have "earned" income. *
END TRANSCRIPT

47% of Tea Partiers Pay No Federal Income Taxes! - Derek Thompson - Business - The Atlantic

*Taxed Enough Already? Or not taxed at all?*
One of the striking ironies of *Fox News running with the statistic that 47% of Americans might not owe federal income taxes* is that Fox News also moonlights as the unofficial station of the Tea Party movement, which clamors for lower taxes. You might ask: half of the country pays no income tax, how much lower do you want? Here's a more troubling point: if the Tea Party movement has a similar share of Americans making under $50,000 as the broader population (as a recent Gallup poll suggests), then why is this movement rallying under the banner "Taxed Enough Already!" when half of them aren't taxed at all?

Forty-five percent of self-identified "Tea Partiers" make less than $50,000 per year, according to a USA Today/Gallup poll. Similarly, 50% of the total population makes less than $50,000 in the same poll. Despite this author's lack of direct access to the tax returns of the Tea Party movement, it seems safe to assume that if about half the country avoids federal income taxes, a similar percentage of the Tea Party movement gets away with the same even as they march and scream about their tax burden.
*This is a gotcha point. But it's a gotcha point worth making, if only to shine light on the sad intellectual bankruptcy of the Tea Party,* a political movement that has taken over the news cycle like a particularly aggressive strain of ragweed. *Tea Partiers want lower income taxes. But many of them probably don't pay income taxes. If we listen to them and bring even more Americans into the zero-income tax pool, we would only concentrate more of the tax burden on wealthy earners ... which conservatives are against. Tea Party apologists on TV will explain that what they're really asking for is lower rates and a broader tax base to diffuse America's tax responsibility. But if half the Tea Party doesn't pay income taxes today, a broader tax base -- even with minuscule rates -- would raise many of their taxes!*


----------



## Oddball

Nobody said anything about Limpbagh and income taxes aren't the only taxes people pay.

Your text wall of misdirection and obfuscation fails.


----------



## Big Fitz

Oddball said:


> Nobody said anything about Limpbagh and income taxes aren't the only taxes people pay.
> 
> Your text wall of misdirection and obfuscation fails.


Oh my gawd!  Revere just hit the tripwire and blew up the entire thread with a EdtheCretin Limbaugh rant. 

Look at him go, now the whole thread will have to repeat the obstacle course over again.


----------



## Charles_Main

I actually just ordered some panels to install on my roof. Don't tell me it's dead. I don't think I can get a refund now


----------



## fyrenza

mdn2000 said:


> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> ... links ...
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.



Well, we knew the Greenies weren't exactly Rocket Scientists, eh?

(Got a FAB smilie for that, too: )

*OOPS!*


----------



## mdn2000

edthecynic said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.
> 
> Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.
> 
> Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
> Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wikipedia, you got to be kidding, so you are learning as you go.
> 
> Oil is needed for Solar panel manufacturer, you use the negative impact of fossil fuel as a reason Solar is better when Solar needs massive amounts of fossil fuel.
> 
> You could just as easily googled the negative impact of the solar energy plants in germany and spain.
> 
> Right now Germany and Spain are halting their Solar energy plans.
> 
> Spain's economy is real bad because of investment in Solar. Go ahead, use your google.
> 
> Your cut and paste is old, Germany and Spain are cutting the funds, stopping the use of solar.
> 
> and again, Solar is 100% dependent on fossil fuel, it can never end our "dependence" on energy, Solar uses more energy so it increases "dependence".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> BioSolar Solar Panels - Solar Panels Made from Plants - The Daily Green
> 
> Plant-Based Solar Panels to Remove Oil from the Equation
> BioSolar is producing components for solar panels made from plant-derived plastics.
> 
> BioSolar starts with recycled cotton and castor beans, and produces a protective backing for solar cells. Its product is intended as a competitor to Tedlar, a petroleum-derived film made by DuPont that is the industry standard for silicon-based solar cells. And it's 25% cheaper, too.
> 
> Oil Rig of the Future: A Solar Panel That Produces Oil: Scientific American
> 
> Oil Rig of the Future: A Solar Panel That Produces Oil
> Researchers propose a novel approach to producing biofuel using diatoms
> 
> The researchers propose creating a biological solar panel, which will contain diatoms instead of photovoltaic cells. Diatoms would float about in a nutrient-rich water solution and produce oil when exposed to sunlight.
> 
> A Solar-Powered Oil Field? - NYTimes.com
> 
> BrightSource Energy has broken ground on a 29-megawatt solar steam plant at a Chevron oil field in Coalinga, Calif.
> 
> The 100-acre projects 7,000 mirrors will focus sunlight on a water-filled boiler that sits atop a 323-foot tower to produce hot, high-pressure steam.
> 
> In a conventional solar power plant, the steam drives a turbine to generate electricity. In this case, the steam will be injected into oil wells to enhance production by heating thick petroleum so it flows more freely. Oil companies typically rely on steam generated by natural gas or other fossil fuels to maximize oil recovery in places like the oil patch in Californias Fresno and Kern counties, where the petroleum is heavy and gooey.
> 
> My Brain Hurts  Solar Powered Oil Fields are Coming  CleanTechnica
> 
> Its a little hard to wrap your head around this one, but global oil giant Chevron (yes, that Chevron) has just announced plans to install a solar power system at the Kern River oil field in California.  This aint no small potatoes, either.  All together, Kern River is the fifth largest oil field in the U.S. and Chevrons solar array will consist of 7, 700 solar panels, according to Reuters.  The system is designed to generate 740 kilowatts of electricity to run Chevrons oil pumps and pipelines at the field.
> 
> The Kern River solar array is just one piece of a $2 billion investment Chevron plans for solar and alternative energy.  Thats a tidy little chunk of the oil companys change, which seems to indicate that the company sees the writing on the wall for fossil fuels.  Not that oil will disappear, just that the potential returns from solar power and other alternative energy in the retail market are starting to look mighty attractive.  Once again, follow the money
> 
> Chevron and Solar Power
> 
> The 8-acre Kern River site will serve as a test ground for seven different types of solar energy that could be deployed at Chevrons facilities worldwide, as detailed in a recent Los Angeles Times story.  Thats actually old news; according to the Times, Chevron started using solar at its facilities since 1992.
> 
> Chevron as a Solar Power Supplier
> 
> Chevron isnt only using solar to pump more fossil fuels.  Its also becoming a solar installer and supplier.  Last month the company announced that it is building a solar array in Mexico, on a 20-acre mine tailing site that it owns.  Solar energy from the installation will be sold to the local grid.  The  company is also building a 3.7 megawatt solar project in partnership with a school district in San Jose, California.  The company has become quite the solar expert and will do the project from soup to nuts, including designing, building, and operating it, as well as assessing its performance.  If Chevron gets out of the oil business it wont be any time soon, but its sure positioning itself to follow the money out of fossil fuels when the time comes.
Click to expand...


Solar is dead without water, you cannot address this fact so you post links to propaganda.

Where do you get the water?


----------



## mdn2000

Charles_Main said:


> I actually just ordered some panels to install on my roof. Don't tell me it's dead. I don't think I can get a refund now



I am discussing only the large scale solar power plants.


----------



## mdn2000

Flopper said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Oh Really.  Today over eight thousand megawatts of power in Germany is supplied by solar power.  At the current rate of expansion, solar power will provide 25% of the power needs of the country by 2050.  By the end of the century most of the electric power in the country will be provide by the sun.  If technological breakthroughs occur, which are most probably  Germany could be completely energy independent by the middle of this century.
> 
> Unless policies in the US change, it seem likely that United States in 2050 will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and foreign oil than are now.
> 
> Solar power in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
> Germany Gets Creative with Renewables : TreeHugger
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wikipedia, you got to be kidding, so you are learning as you go.
> 
> Oil is needed for Solar panel manufacturer, you use the negative impact of fossil fuel as a reason Solar is better when Solar needs massive amounts of fossil fuel.
> 
> You could just as easily googled the negative impact of the solar energy plants in germany and spain.
> 
> Right now Germany and Spain are halting their Solar energy plans.
> 
> Spain's economy is real bad because of investment in Solar. Go ahead, use your google.
> 
> Your cut and paste is old, Germany and Spain are cutting the funds, stopping the use of solar.
> 
> and again, Solar is 100% dependent on fossil fuel, it can never end our "dependence" on energy, Solar uses more energy so it increases "dependence".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Nope
> 
> The law, which both the German parliament and Chancellor Angela Merkel's cabinet are to consider in the coming weeks, would cut state-guaranteed prices by 15 percent for energy produced by solar panels on open ground.  It would also cut prices by 16 percent for solar panels on roofs, where 80 percent of solar panels in Germany are, and eliminate subsidies for panels placed on arable land. A previous plan by Environment Minister Norbert Roettgen was criticized for not going far enough.
> "The objective is to reduce excessive stimulation without hindering an expansion of green energy."
> Germany to cut subsidies for solar energy | Germany | Deutsche Welle | 23.02.2010
> 
> Spain is one of the most advanced countries in use of solar energy.  Just short of 3% of Spain's electric power comes from solar.  Considering the financial situation in Europe it is not surprising that Spain would cut back on subsidies. Solar power in Spain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> This is a far cry from your ridiculous claim that they halted solar energy plans.
> 
> There is some truth in your claim that oil is used to manufacture solar panels but since the life of a solar is at least 20 to 25 years, the small amount of oil used in the manufacture is no consequence when you consider the amount of energy produced.  Panels using Castor beans and cottonseed oil are now coming on the market.
> Miss Solar, Solar Panel, Photovoltaic, PV, Solar module, Solar Battery Charges, Solar Brick, Solar Lights
> BioSolar Solar Panels - Solar Panels Made from Plants - The Daily Green
> 
> *
Click to expand...


Oh, I guess I will have to link to Super-Wiki, everyone knows that Super-Wiki is a far better source than Wiki. 

That was a sharp cut and paste you did, maybe you could help me cut and paste as good.

So its my move, I link, cut and paste, trump your card, you google, cut and paste, then its my turn, right.

The issue in the USA is water.

Spain's Solar industry is dead, billions of dollars is spent, that money will keep the lights on a short time, no more.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> September 30, 2009
> Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a
> Need for Water
> By TODD WOODY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMARGOSA VALLEY, Nev.  In a rural corner of Nevada reeling from the recession,
> a bit of salvation seemed to arrive last year. A German developer, Solar Millennium,
> announced plans to build two large solar farms here that would harness the sun to
> generate electricity, creating hundreds of jobs.
> But then things got messy. The company revealed that its preferred method of cooling the
> power plants would consume 1.3 billion gallons of water a year, about 20 percent of this
> desert valleys available water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, solar developers have already been forced to switch to less water-intensive
> technologies when local officials have refused to turn on the tap. Other big solar projects
> are mired in disputes with state regulators over water consumption.
> To date, the flashpoint for such conflicts has been the Southwest, where dozens of
> multibillion-dollar solar power plants are planned for thousands of acres of desert.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
Click to expand...


Solar steam power can recycle the water used to run turbines perhaps even with 100% recovery.

Epic Fail!


----------



## loosecannon

Not to mention that while it doesn't rain much in the mojave, it does rain, and that rain water can be captured and used to run the process. 

With only 6 inches of annual rain each acre of solar farm has available 163,000 gallons of water annually that is easily collectible. Just gutters and pipes or the same kind of systems used to divert storm discharges in ordinary cities.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> Not to mention that while it doesn't rain much in the mojave, it does rain, and that rain water can be captured and used to run the process.
> 
> With only 6 inches of annual rain each acre of solar farm has available 163,000 gallons of water annually that is easily collectible. Just gutters and pipes or the same kind of systems used to divert storm discharges in ordinary cities.



I guess the Solar power plants have not thought of this, too bad they dont read the message boards. I am against things that steal billions of dollars and drive up the cost of electricity so am not going to tell them about your post.

Solar power will remain dead.

How many total acres of delicate desert habitat are you advocating the destruction of.


----------



## rdean

Revere said:


> If energy policy is left to government, you'll get the equivalent of the Trabant and the rotary phone.



What the hell is wrong with you?  You don't back up any of your assertions with even the tiniest bit of proof:

First you make this wild claim:

*NASA is being tossed aside by the Obama regime. They're not going to be doing anything but watching the weather before long.
All consumer electronics and most pharmeceuticals are privately researched, for one. *

Which I proved wrong and attached a link to NASA current strategy.  Then you posted:

*NASA isn't going to be throwing off any technology anymore that it hasn't had for 20 years, or wasn't co-developed for the military.
Press releases from government aren't research. *

Then I posted links refuting that.  Then you posted:

*I like guns and rockets and extraterrestrial rovers, but that's not technology with any consumer throwoff.
Google stands a better chance of delivering energy and technology solutions consumers will accept. *

And then Posted dozens of inventions that were developed directly from NASA technology, then you said none were newer than 30 years, then I posted another dozen that were very recent, including the panoramic camera used on the Mars rovers that are still in operation as well as modern imaging devices.

What is your problem?  At least back up a measly one or two assertions.  Otherwise, you look like a typical right wingnut.


----------



## Trajan

Charles_Main said:


> I actually just ordered some panels to install on my roof. Don't tell me it's dead. I don't think I can get a refund now



cool, how long to till you see daylight on your investment?


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> I guess the Solar power plants have not thought of this, too bad they dont read the message boards. I am against things that steal billions of dollars and drive up the cost of electricity so am not going to tell them about your post.
> 
> Solar power will remain dead.
> 
> How many total acres of delicate desert habitat are you advocating the destruction of.




quite a few, if you have ever been to the mojave you would know it is about as dead as a doornail as it is.

mojave desert - Google Search

but your point is vacuous. Farmland, industrial land and urban land are far more impacted by human development than is a solar power plant locale. So are coal mines and oilfields. 

And oil drilling wastes a phenomenal amount of fresh water too. 

Solar water consumption can be offset by recycling water and rainfall collection, so your thread is a failure. Just sayin.

You just hate green energy.


----------



## Revere

I hate being told I should get by with less.


----------



## edthecynic

mdn2000 said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention that while it doesn't rain much in the mojave, it does rain, and that rain water can be captured and used to run the process.
> 
> With only 6 inches of annual rain each acre of solar farm has available 163,000 gallons of water annually that is easily collectible. Just gutters and pipes or the same kind of systems used to divert storm discharges in ordinary cities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the Solar power plants have not thought of this, too bad they dont read the message boards. I am against things that steal billions of dollars and drive up the cost of electricity so am not going to tell them about your post.
> 
> Solar power will remain dead.
> 
> *How many total acres of delicate desert habitat are you advocating the destruction of.*
Click to expand...

Cactus Hugger


----------



## Revere

No less than Diane Feinstein is standing in the way of putting solar panels in the desert.

Doesn't get any better than that for NIMBY liberal standard bearers.

Feinstein: Don&#39;t Spoil Our Desert With Solar Panels - FoxNews.com


----------



## Charles_Main

rdean said:


> Revere said:
> 
> 
> 
> If energy policy is left to government, you'll get the equivalent of the Trabant and the rotary phone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the hell is wrong with you?  You don't back up any of your assertions with even the tiniest bit of proof:
> .
Click to expand...


Yeah Rdean would never make wild sweeping claims with out a shred of proof.

Nah never.


----------



## Flopper

mdn2000 said:


> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wikipedia, you got to be kidding, so you are learning as you go.
> 
> Oil is needed for Solar panel manufacturer, you use the negative impact of fossil fuel as a reason Solar is better when Solar needs massive amounts of fossil fuel.
> 
> You could just as easily googled the negative impact of the solar energy plants in germany and spain.
> 
> Right now Germany and Spain are halting their Solar energy plans.
> 
> Spain's economy is real bad because of investment in Solar. Go ahead, use your google.
> 
> Your cut and paste is old, Germany and Spain are cutting the funds, stopping the use of solar.
> 
> and again, Solar is 100% dependent on fossil fuel, it can never end our "dependence" on energy, Solar uses more energy so it increases "dependence".
> 
> 
> 
> *Nope
> 
> The law, which both the German parliament and Chancellor Angela Merkel's cabinet are to consider in the coming weeks, would cut state-guaranteed prices by 15 percent for energy produced by solar panels on open ground.  It would also cut prices by 16 percent for solar panels on roofs, where 80 percent of solar panels in Germany are, and eliminate subsidies for panels placed on arable land. A previous plan by Environment Minister Norbert Roettgen was criticized for not going far enough.
> "The objective is to reduce excessive stimulation without hindering an expansion of green energy."
> Germany to cut subsidies for solar energy | Germany | Deutsche Welle | 23.02.2010
> 
> Spain is one of the most advanced countries in use of solar energy.  Just short of 3% of Spain's electric power comes from solar.  Considering the financial situation in Europe it is not surprising that Spain would cut back on subsidies. Solar power in Spain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> This is a far cry from your ridiculous claim that they halted solar energy plans.
> 
> There is some truth in your claim that oil is used to manufacture solar panels but since the life of a solar is at least 20 to 25 years, the small amount of oil used in the manufacture is no consequence when you consider the amount of energy produced.  Panels using Castor beans and cottonseed oil are now coming on the market.
> Miss Solar, Solar Panel, Photovoltaic, PV, Solar module, Solar Battery Charges, Solar Brick, Solar Lights
> BioSolar Solar Panels - Solar Panels Made from Plants - The Daily Green
> 
> *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, I guess I will have to link to Super-Wiki, everyone knows that Super-Wiki is a far better source than Wiki.
> 
> That was a sharp cut and paste you did, maybe you could help me cut and paste as good.
> 
> So its my move, I link, cut and paste, trump your card, you google, cut and paste, then its my turn, right.
> 
> The issue in the USA is water.
> 
> Spain's Solar industry is dead, billions of dollars is spent, that money will keep the lights on a short time, no more.
Click to expand...

*It doesn't sound like many people agree with you. The market for solar power plants is expected to grow at an average annual rate of 20 percent over the next decade"

Development Of Giant Solar-Power Plants Move Forward In U.S.
Development Of Giant Solar-Power Plants Move Forward In U.S. - FoxBusiness.com

LG Electronics to Spend 1 Trillion Won on Solar Cells by 2015
LG Electronics to Spend 1 Trillion Won on Solar Cells by 2015 - BusinessWeek

U.S. solar power: doubling in 2010!
U.S. solar power: doubling in 2010! | The Energy Collective

Unprecedented growth seen for solar energy
Unprecedented growth seen for solar energy*


----------



## mdn2000

Flopper said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Nope
> 
> The law, which both the German parliament and Chancellor Angela Merkel's cabinet are to consider in the coming weeks, would cut state-guaranteed prices by 15 percent for energy produced by solar panels on open ground.  It would also cut prices by 16 percent for solar panels on roofs, where 80 percent of solar panels in Germany are, and eliminate subsidies for panels placed on arable land. A previous plan by Environment Minister Norbert Roettgen was criticized for not going far enough.
> "The objective is to reduce excessive stimulation without hindering an expansion of green energy."
> Germany to cut subsidies for solar energy | Germany | Deutsche Welle | 23.02.2010
> 
> Spain is one of the most advanced countries in use of solar energy.  Just short of 3% of Spain's electric power comes from solar.  Considering the financial situation in Europe it is not surprising that Spain would cut back on subsidies. Solar power in Spain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> This is a far cry from your ridiculous claim that they halted solar energy plans.
> 
> There is some truth in your claim that oil is used to manufacture solar panels but since the life of a solar is at least 20 to 25 years, the small amount of oil used in the manufacture is no consequence when you consider the amount of energy produced.  Panels using Castor beans and cottonseed oil are now coming on the market.
> Miss Solar, Solar Panel, Photovoltaic, PV, Solar module, Solar Battery Charges, Solar Brick, Solar Lights
> BioSolar Solar Panels - Solar Panels Made from Plants - The Daily Green
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, I guess I will have to link to Super-Wiki, everyone knows that Super-Wiki is a far better source than Wiki.
> 
> That was a sharp cut and paste you did, maybe you could help me cut and paste as good.
> 
> So its my move, I link, cut and paste, trump your card, you google, cut and paste, then its my turn, right.
> 
> The issue in the USA is water.
> 
> Spain's Solar industry is dead, billions of dollars is spent, that money will keep the lights on a short time, no more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *It doesn't sound like many people agree with you. The market for solar power plants is expected to grow at an average annual rate of 20 percent over the next decade"
> 
> Development Of Giant Solar-Power Plants Move Forward In U.S.
> Development Of Giant Solar-Power Plants Move Forward In U.S. - FoxBusiness.com
> 
> LG Electronics to Spend 1 Trillion Won on Solar Cells by 2015
> LG Electronics to Spend 1 Trillion Won on Solar Cells by 2015 - BusinessWeek
> 
> U.S. solar power: doubling in 2010!
> U.S. solar power: doubling in 2010! | The Energy Collective
> 
> Unprecedented growth seen for solar energy
> Unprecedented growth seen for solar energy*
Click to expand...


Spain Pricks Solar Power Bubble as Greek Fate Looms (Update1) - BusinessWeek



> Bloomberg
> Spain Pricks Solar Power Bubble as Greek Fate Looms (Update1)
> April 30, 2010, 5:54 AM EDT
> MORE FROM BUSINESSWEEK
> 
> Spain May Cut Rates for Existing Solar, Wind Plants (Update2)
> Spain May Cut Rates Supporting $24 Billion Solar Boom (Update4)
> Renovalia Says Spain Wont Cut Existing Solar Rates (Update1)
> Mediterranean Solar Bloc Investors Need Clear Rules, EU Says
> Spain May Cut Rates for Existing Solar Plants, Government Says
> STORY TOOLS
> 
> e-mail this story
> print this story
> 
> 0digg
> add to Business Exchange
> (Adds solar subsidy data from government report in 10th, 11th paragraphs.)
> 
> By Ben Sills
> 
> April 30 (Bloomberg) -- Spain is lancing an 18 billion-euro ($24 billion) investment bubble in solar energy that has boosted public liabilities, choking off new projects as it works to cut power prices and insulate itself from Greeces debt crisis.
> 
> Industry Minister Miguel Sebastian is negotiating reductions in subsidies for solar plants that would curb energy costs, a ministry spokesman said this week. Grupo T-Solar Global SA, the worlds biggest photovoltaic plant owner, shelved its Spanish stock offering three days ago. Solar Opportunities SL postponed a 130 million-euro deal due to be signed today.
> 
> Theyve put the fear of god into all these investors, said Paul Turney, chief executive officer of Madrid-based Solar Opportunities. By the time theyve finished dithering around, theyll have hurt their credibility so badly that no one will want to invest.
> 
> Spain is battling on several fronts to revive its economy and convince government bondholders it can avoid getting dragged into a Greek-style debt spiral after Standard & Poors cut its credit rating April 28. Solar-plant owners including General Electric Co. earn about 12 times whats paid for power from fossil fuels. Most of that is a subsidy charged to customers



Massive subsidy charged directly to me. I cannot afford it. Pour billions of dollars, tax dollars, money collected, stolen out of my pocket, taken through tyrannical tax policies.


----------



## mdn2000

The American Spectator : California?s Green Nightmare



> Meanwhile, California's celebrated AB 32 climate change law will take effect in 2012. But it is already causing an outsourcing of manufacturing, construction, and utility investment in anticipation of the new regulations. A Riverside construction company, CalPortland Cement, announced in late 2009 it was closing its plant because of AB 32's impending regulations. The CEO wrote: "A cement plant cannot be picked up and moved, but the next new plant probably won't be built in California," but rather in Nevada or China.






> California&#8217;s Green Nightmare
> By Stephen Moore from the October 2010 issue
> 
> It's hard to know where the fairy tale of "green jobs" first came from. It was probably a clever marketing scheme by radical environmentalists who realized that their anti-growth climate change agenda wasn't going to sell among the American electorate if workers realized how many jobs would be eviscerated by the new taxes and regulation. So, from somewhere out of Madison Avenue or K Street, the left devised the green jobs story line: we can impose a $1 trillion new tax on the U.S. economy over the next decade, and it will save jobs, as hundreds of thousands of Americans begin assembling windmills and solar paneling



Wow, jobs are moving to China because California cannot afford Solar Energy.

I most likely will move as well, electricity costs to much money. 

California is a bankrupt welfare state, you get to pay the illegal aliens electric bill, you get to give money to California to make Edison rich.

Who can pay the highest electrical rates in the Country, who can live in a state that is bankrupt.

I cant. 

The collapse has began.


----------



## loosecannon

Revere said:


> I hate being told I should get by with less.



your wife put you on a budget?


----------



## loosecannon

more like 7th most expensive electricity in the nation:

Electric Power Monthly - Average Retail Price of Electricity to Ultimate Customers by End-Use Sector, by State

and your post did not indicate that that cement plant was moving due to electrical rates, which btw, are not gonna be a whole lot cheaper in either NV or China.


----------



## uscitizen

I was offered a job in southern CA 40 years ago and turned it down because of the same problems there as today.

Anyone who does not like it there , move.

but not to KY, It sucks here, worst place in the world to live.


----------



## loosecannon

CA is still among the best places in the country to live. But I agree it won't hurt my feelings if 20% of the state moves like they did in the 80s.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> more like 7th most expensive electricity in the nation:
> 
> Electric Power Monthly - Average Retail Price of Electricity to Ultimate Customers by End-Use Sector, by State
> 
> and your post did not indicate that that cement plant was moving due to electrical rates, which btw, are not gonna be a whole lot cheaper in either NV or China.



Sorry I did not make it clear that the cement company was moving due to electrical rates being too high. AB 32 is stated it the article, that is California's climate change law that mandates the kind of electricity I will use, let me re-word that, the government is dictating exactly what source electricity will come from, California is dictating the price, California is forcing the people to pay more money for electricity at the same time California is taxing us at a higher rate and giving my money to their friends who own the Green Energy companies.

So not only do I pay more for the electricity, more than I can afford, but I loose more in tax money so I have less money to pay for electricity, at the same time food prices are skyrocketing because everyone passes the cost of electricity to me. 

You cut and paste, you need to think, what makes you think your first google result is anything less than paid propaganda put out by special interest groups. 

I can say anything I want, build a website, put my idea out on the web as a news story, I can than post my idea here and tell you to look it up and see if I am right. What you seem not to realize is that you will find the answer I want you to believe because I have paid google to put my website first in the search.

What makes you think what you linked and posted to is true and accurate. 

Its not.

In California first you must identify the type of customer to determine the rate.

SCE - Residential Rates



> Schedule D-APS-E: Domestic Automatic Powershift-Enhanced
> Schedule D-CARE: California Alternate Rates for Energy, Domestic Service
> Schedule D-FERA - Family Electric Rate Assistance
> Schedule DE: Domestic Service to Utility Employees
> Schedule DM: Multifamily Accommodation - Residential Hotel - Qualifying RV Park
> Schedule DMS-1: Domestic Service, Multifamily Accommodation, Submetered
> Schedule DMS-2: Domestic Service, Mobilehome Park Multifamily Accommodation, Submetered
> Schedule DMS-3: Domestic Service, Qualifying RV Park Accommodtion, Submetered
> Schedule DS: Domestic Seasonal
> Schedule MASH-VNM: Multifamily Affordable Solar Housing Virtual Net Metering
> Schedule MB-E: Medical Baseline - Exemption
> Schedule TOU-D-1: Time-of-Use Domestic
> Schedule TOU-D-2: Time-of-Use Domestic
> Schedule TOU-D-T: Time of Use Tiered Domestic
> Schedule TOU-D-TEV: Time-of-Use Domestic Tiered Electric Vehicle Charging
> Schedule TOU-EV-1: Domestic Time-of-Use, Electric Vehicle Charging



I do not see that your link defines which rate they refer to, no matter, the rate is not real, as I will show next.

http://www.sce.com/NR/sc3/tm2/pdf/ce12-12.pdf



> APPLICABILITY
> Applicable to domestic service including lighting, heating, cooking, and power or combination thereof in
> a single-family accommodation; also to domestic farm service when supplied through the farm
> operator's domestic meter.
> A Peak Time Rebate (PTR) will apply to Bundled Service Customers who reduce their energy
> consumption during PTR Events as described in the Special Conditions section of this Schedule. PTR
> will apply upon the installation of an Edison SmartConnect meter and the meter is program ready.
> PTR is not applicable to customers served under Schedules DM, DMS-1, DMS-2, DMS-3, DS, or CPP.
> PTR with enabling technology is not applicable to customers receiving Medical Baseline Allocation(s)
> for air conditioning.
> TERRITORY
> Within the entire territory served.
> RATES
> Delivery Service
> Total1 URG*** DWR
> Energy Charge- $/kWh/Meter/Day
> Baseline Service
> Summer 0.04548 0.09564 0.03763
> Winter 0.04548 0.09564 0.03763
> Nonbaseline Service*
> 101% - 130% of Baseline - Summer 0.06539 0.09564 0.03763
> Winter 0.06539 0.09564 0.03763
> 131% - 200% of Baseline - Summer 0.15727 (R) 0.09564 0.03763
> Winter 0.15727 (R) 0.09564 0.03763
> 201% - 300% of Baseline - Summer 0.19227 (R) 0.09564 0.03763
> Winter 0.19227 (R) 0.09564 0.03763
> Over 300% of Baseline - Summer 0.22727 (R) 0.09564 0.03763
> Winter 0.22727 (R) 0.09564 0.03763
> Basic Charge - $/Meter/Day
> Single-Family Residence 0.029
> Multi-Family Residence 0.022
> Minimum Charge** - $/Meter/Day
> Single-Family Residence 0.059
> Multi-Family Residence 0.044
> Peak Time Rebate - $kWh (0.75)
> Peak Time Rebate
> w/enabling technology - $/kWh (1.25)
> Generation2
> * Nonbaseline Service includes all kWh in excess of applicable Baseline allocations as described in Preliminary Statement, Part H, Baseline Service.
> ** The Minimum Charge is applicable when the Delivery Service Energy Charge, plus the applicable Basic Charge is less than the Minimum Charge.
> *** The ongoing Competition Transition Charge (CTC) of $0.00700 per kWh is recovered in the URG component of Generation.
> 1 Total = Total Delivery Service rates are applicable to Bundled Service, Direct Access (DA) and Community Choice Aggregation Service (CCA
> Service) Customers, except DA and CCA Service Customers are not subject to the DWRBC rate component of this Schedule but instead pay the
> DWRBC as provided by Schedule DA-CRS or Schedule CCA-CRS.
> 2 Gen = Generation  The Gen rates are applicable only to Bundled Service Customers. When calculating the Energy Charge, the Gen portion is
> calculated as described in the Billing Calculation Special Condition of this Schedule.



So I am a family of four, how much is my bill each month, during the summer. 

You can see how I get angry at the people who tell me that I must pay more money for solar energy. I alread pay too much, in tax, for hamburger (five dollars a pound), for registering my truck, for gas. 

I can state the facts about solar power, and it may not be your fault, or maybe it is, but you, and I mean you as in all who post in opposition, so I state the facts about Solar and the expensive electricity and as proof I am wrong I table of electrical rates is posted that has nothing to do with how I am billed every month. 

People who are elected to office are stealing my money, passing laws that make others rich, and you know why, because just like you they google the electrical rates and find the table you just posted, now they believe my rate is fair, based on other people, not on my needs or on how hard I work. 

You google and read headlines for answers  and come up with the wrong answers. You are taught at school to go to google to learn, to research, and google is used by corporations and politicians to teach you what they want you to believe. 

So you argue about the water, state I am wrong, its not an issue, and I see on something as simple as my electric bill you are as wrong as any person can be, that when challenged you do look for an answer, which is good, yet you come up with a wrong answer, and dont get me wrong I am not trying to be a jerk to you but you must understand I feel pretty piss poor right now. 

You have voted in the politicians that are destroying my life, you not only support them, you tell me I am wrong about my electric bill and you have never ever seen my bill. You are so wrong yet think yourself right.

Water, your idea is wrong, its not even close to reality, as I have shown that you have no idea what the cost of electricity is.

What I have posted is all the result of government politicians, bureaucracy, special interest groups, lobbyist, all reflected in my convoluted electrical bill. 

Sorry my friends, Solar is dead, all that you have shown is that you dont know how to research what you believe. 

Of course I dont doubt some of you may be political hacks, working a job, making sure the liberals always have the last word, the loudest word, while being completely wrong thus spreading the propaganda that the rich need to become even richer.


----------



## CountofTuscany

mdn2000 said:


> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.



Not true. Even systems with a covering of dust still convert sun energy to electricity.


----------



## mdn2000

CountofTuscany said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true. Even systems with a covering of dust still convert sun energy to electricity.
Click to expand...


What are you smoking, show me where I state what you write, anyhow you dont have to jump in at the end of a thread with a wild accusation, I have given links to actual Solar power plants, hell, look it up yourself and its clear, dont read articles, you get .pdf files of plans submitted to local county offices, environmental impact studies, everything, minutes of meetings,

So, what I wrote is true, what I wrote is fact, what I wrote is taken from .pdf files of solar power plants application for permits to construct green energy as submitted to local governments.

nobody here said a little dust stops the electricity, its all about efficiency, reliability, longevity and proper maintenance of ones equipment. You where glasses you keep your glasses dirty? What about your car, do you wash your car. Do you not own one thing you must keep clean if you want it to work? Have you not ever heard that you must clean things. Does it not even make sense to you that things work better clean, do I need to provide a link to prove this, because I have to tell you, if I have to link something to prove to you a solar power plant lasts longer clean than I doubt a link is enough to educate or teach you.

A little dust, how about desert sand, there aint a little dust in the desert, there is a desert full of sand.

You know how much sand is in the desert, all of it, the entire desert, except for the rock, the fragments of rock, the tiny fragments of granite, the dust of granite, lave rocks.

In the Mojave you also have Searles Valley and Trona, would you call that a little dust. I am laughing now, if you knew what I was talking about you would think I think your dumb.

Trona, California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## mdn2000

I guess I presumed what I consider simple knowledge, common knowledge, know to all or most here, so I apologize if I was curt, to put it mildly. I should of offered more information, better now, then never.

So here goes.

Solar is put in the desert where it is real hot in the summer, very dry which means little water.

A desert is also full of rock, sand, dirt, deposits of minerals, open mines of minerals, minerals on the ground. Everything is real dirty, it is kind of like the desert is made of sand, hundreds and hundreds of miles of sand and rock, and dirt, minerals, even plants and the dust from plants that die. 

If you have never been in the desert you can trust me when I tell you its a dirty place, there are even giant hills of sand, it gets blown in big hills we call dunes, for miles, and miles, some places have old volcanoes, there are rocks that are uplifted from the ground, things with many layers of different rock and dirty and deposits of minerals in wavy lines, in straight lines.

You can find big rocks, little rocks, rocks that can make you rich.

The desert is just a giant place with sand and rocks.

Think of the desert as a place that your mom would not want you to play in because you would get your school clothes dirty.

Think of the desert as a place that if you left your car out there it would get real dirty very fast, in month easy, and if you did not wash off the sand, dirty, mineral deposit on every shiny part of your car you would destroy the paint.

Now imagine that light coating baked into the surface of your car, left there for months, withing a short period that paint on your car is destroyed.

I wonder what a little Mojave Hell dust and sand whipped up by a storm will do to nice, shiny, perfect, little, wonder, solar panels, manufactured in a clean environment to exacting standards, as perfect a process as billions of dollars of stolen tax dollars. Solar panels researched and developed with my tax dollars for someone else to get rich. Solar panels designed in public funded universities, designed with super computers to get amazing performance.

The shine has something to do with a simple condition needed to convert sunlight to energy. Thats all, no shine and it really does deteriorate rapidly.

The damage is done almost immediately, no responsible operator will allow damage to expensive equipment, remember, it is not disputed that solar power is some of the most expensive and easily damaged equipment used for electricity. 

Everyone cleans their car, I cant believe people could possibly not know expensive equipment in the desert will get dirty, sometimes filthy, and due to the harsh conditions will be permanently damaged if not cleaned immediately.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Sorry I did not make it clear that the cement company was moving due to electrical rates being too high. AB 32 is stated it the article, that is California's climate change law that mandates the kind of electricity I will use, let me re-word that, the government is dictating exactly what source electricity will come from, California is dictating the price, California is forcing the people to pay more money for electricity at the same time California is taxing us at a higher rate and giving my money to their friends who own the Green Energy companies.



actually no.

The article did not say that the plant was shutting down because it's electrical rates would increase. In fact it said that the plant would close due to it's CO2 impacts. Cement manufacture requires lots of energy in the form of heat, but more importantly the chemistry involved in the process produces vast quantities of CO2.

You just assumed otherwise. I read the article, you should try that.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> I guess I presumed what I consider simple knowledge, common knowledge, know to all or most here, so I apologize if I was curt, to put it mildly. I should of offered more information, better now, then never.
> 
> So here goes.
> 
> Solar is put in the desert where it is real hot in the summer, very dry which means little water.
> 
> A desert is also full of rock, sand, dirt, deposits of minerals, open mines of minerals, minerals on the ground. Everything is real dirty, it is kind of like the desert is made of sand, hundreds and hundreds of miles of sand and rock, and dirt, minerals, even plants and the dust from plants that die.
> 
> If you have never been in the desert you can trust me when I tell you its a dirty place, there are even giant hills of sand, it gets blown in big hills we call dunes, for miles, and miles, some places have old volcanoes, there are rocks that are uplifted from the ground, things with many layers of different rock and dirty and deposits of minerals in wavy lines, in straight lines.
> 
> You can find big rocks, little rocks, rocks that can make you rich.
> 
> The desert is just a giant place with sand and rocks.
> 
> Think of the desert as a place that your mom would not want you to play in because you would get your school clothes dirty.
> 
> Think of the desert as a place that if you left your car out there it would get real dirty very fast, in month easy, and if you did not wash off the sand, dirty, mineral deposit on every shiny part of your car you would destroy the paint.
> 
> Now imagine that light coating baked into the surface of your car, left there for months, withing a short period that paint on your car is destroyed.
> 
> I wonder what a little Mojave Hell dust and sand whipped up by a storm will do to nice, shiny, perfect, little, wonder, solar panels, manufactured in a clean environment to exacting standards, as perfect a process as billions of dollars of stolen tax dollars. Solar panels researched and developed with my tax dollars for someone else to get rich. Solar panels designed in public funded universities, designed with super computers to get amazing performance.
> 
> The shine has something to do with a simple condition needed to convert sunlight to energy. Thats all, no shine and it really does deteriorate rapidly.
> 
> The damage is done almost immediately, no responsible operator will allow damage to expensive equipment, remember, it is not disputed that solar power is some of the most expensive and easily damaged equipment used for electricity.
> 
> Everyone cleans their car, I cant believe people could possibly not know expensive equipment in the desert will get dirty, sometimes filthy, and due to the harsh conditions will be permanently damaged if not cleaned immediately.



actually deserts are remarkably clean and free of dust. Downright sterile, skies as clear as any place I have ever seen and I have seen half the world.

Farmland is dusty. Very, very dusty.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I did not make it clear that the cement company was moving due to electrical rates being too high. AB 32 is stated it the article, that is California's climate change law that mandates the kind of electricity I will use, let me re-word that, the government is dictating exactly what source electricity will come from, California is dictating the price, California is forcing the people to pay more money for electricity at the same time California is taxing us at a higher rate and giving my money to their friends who own the Green Energy companies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> actually no.
> 
> The article did not say that the plant was shutting down because it's electrical rates would increase. In fact it said that the plant would close due to it's CO2 impacts. Cement manufacture requires lots of energy in the form of heat, but more importantly the chemistry involved in the process produces vast quantities of CO2.
> 
> You just assumed otherwise. I read the article, you should try that.
Click to expand...


Yes CO2 impacts, California's version of cap and trade, tax all forms of fossil energy and raise the rates of electricity. 

Try again, 






You know nothing of which you speak and you no less of that which you read, until you can come to an epiphany, that there is dust, dirt, and sand in the desert, then anything a bit more advanced like electricity will be beyond your grasp


----------



## mdn2000

LooseCannon, let me get this straight, Cement plants dont use electricity, they use heat. I guess you did not see any Cement plants in the desert, anyhow, for everyone else I post this.

http://www.texascenter.org/publications/cement.pdf



> Average consumption of electricity per metric ton of cement produce is 135 kwh



That was the second picture i posted of the desert, first one shows a true chemical dust storm in the Mojave desert.


----------



## mdn2000

mdn2000 said:


> CountofTuscany said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water kills Solar energy, it will always need water and that water will always be needed elsewhere.
> 
> On the top of your house, still need to clean it.
> 
> Further the financing is crippling. Pure stupidity to allow a company to put a 30,000$ lien on your house.
> 
> No matter where you put a solar panel you still need water to clean it. Last time I checked there is water rationing everywhere in California.
> 
> Where you going to get all that extra water? You cannot even water your lawn, you think you can water your roof?
> 
> On warehouses, with a crew washing the solar panels, during a drought, in a desert, when that water is needed for food. Too expensive to wash.
> 
> What about the environmental impact of using fossil fuels to pump extra water to households to wash solar panels. Even on a house, solar energy cannot exist without fossil energy to pump the water to clean hundreds of millions of solar panels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true. Even systems with a covering of dust still convert sun energy to electricity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you smoking, show me where I state what you write, anyhow you dont have to jump in at the end of a thread with a wild accusation, I have given links to actual Solar power plants, hell, look it up yourself and its clear, dont read articles, you get .pdf files of plans submitted to local county offices, environmental impact studies, everything, minutes of meetings,
> 
> So, what I wrote is true, what I wrote is fact, what I wrote is taken from .pdf files of solar power plants application for permits to construct green energy as submitted to local governments.
> 
> nobody here said a little dust stops the electricity, its all about efficiency, reliability, longevity and proper maintenance of ones equipment. You where glasses you keep your glasses dirty? What about your car, do you wash your car. Do you not own one thing you must keep clean if you want it to work? Have you not ever heard that you must clean things. Does it not even make sense to you that things work better clean, do I need to provide a link to prove this, because I have to tell you, if I have to link something to prove to you a solar power plant lasts longer clean than I doubt a link is enough to educate or teach you.
> 
> A little dust, how about desert sand, there aint a little dust in the desert, there is a desert full of sand.
> 
> You know how much sand is in the desert, all of it, the entire desert, except for the rock, the fragments of rock, the tiny fragments of granite, the dust of granite, lave rocks.
> 
> In the Mojave you also have Searles Valley and Trona, would you call that a little dust. I am laughing now, if you knew what I was talking about you would think I think your dumb.
> 
> Trona, California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


See that white stuff in the desert sky, you know what that white stuff is, dust, made of sodium and potassium minerals of the carbonate, sulfate, borate and halide classes of mineralogy.


----------



## mdn2000

Traveled across half the world and never saw a dust devil in the desert, never even heard of a dust storm in the Desert.

People who watch CNN have heard of desert dust storms but loosecannon has no idea they exist.

Loosecannon, you sound like you are an under achiever who has yet to graduate high school.


----------



## Charles_Main

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I presumed what I consider simple knowledge, common knowledge, know to all or most here, so I apologize if I was curt, to put it mildly. I should of offered more information, better now, then never.
> 
> So here goes.
> 
> Solar is put in the desert where it is real hot in the summer, very dry which means little water.
> 
> A desert is also full of rock, sand, dirt, deposits of minerals, open mines of minerals, minerals on the ground. Everything is real dirty, it is kind of like the desert is made of sand, hundreds and hundreds of miles of sand and rock, and dirt, minerals, even plants and the dust from plants that die.
> 
> If you have never been in the desert you can trust me when I tell you its a dirty place, there are even giant hills of sand, it gets blown in big hills we call dunes, for miles, and miles, some places have old volcanoes, there are rocks that are uplifted from the ground, things with many layers of different rock and dirty and deposits of minerals in wavy lines, in straight lines.
> 
> You can find big rocks, little rocks, rocks that can make you rich.
> 
> The desert is just a giant place with sand and rocks.
> 
> Think of the desert as a place that your mom would not want you to play in because you would get your school clothes dirty.
> 
> Think of the desert as a place that if you left your car out there it would get real dirty very fast, in month easy, and if you did not wash off the sand, dirty, mineral deposit on every shiny part of your car you would destroy the paint.
> 
> Now imagine that light coating baked into the surface of your car, left there for months, withing a short period that paint on your car is destroyed.
> 
> I wonder what a little Mojave Hell dust and sand whipped up by a storm will do to nice, shiny, perfect, little, wonder, solar panels, manufactured in a clean environment to exacting standards, as perfect a process as billions of dollars of stolen tax dollars. Solar panels researched and developed with my tax dollars for someone else to get rich. Solar panels designed in public funded universities, designed with super computers to get amazing performance.
> 
> The shine has something to do with a simple condition needed to convert sunlight to energy. Thats all, no shine and it really does deteriorate rapidly.
> 
> The damage is done almost immediately, no responsible operator will allow damage to expensive equipment, remember, it is not disputed that solar power is some of the most expensive and easily damaged equipment used for electricity.
> 
> Everyone cleans their car, I cant believe people could possibly not know expensive equipment in the desert will get dirty, sometimes filthy, and due to the harsh conditions will be permanently damaged if not cleaned immediately.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> actually deserts are remarkably clean and free of dust. Downright sterile, skies as clear as any place I have ever seen and I have seen half the world.
> 
> Farmland is dusty. Very, very dusty.
Click to expand...


Apparently you have never driven from Phoenix to LA Or anywhere in New Mexico. The road is peppered with signs warning about Dust storms and advising you do not drive through them and do not stop along the road in them.

Similar signs can be found through out the Desert SW of the US.


----------



## Old Rocks

Revere said:


> Entrepreneurs, not the US Department of Energy, will make viable solar solutions, if they exist.
> 
> The Federal government should not be picking winners and losers in techology.



I see. The federal government really wasted the money they gave in a grant to that fellow in '48 that wanted to investigate the properties of some kind of funny stuff called semiconductors. Can you imagine a more useless waste of government money?


----------



## Old Rocks

And then there was that project that came in 10 times over budget, did not achieve it's primary objective at all, and was given up that it would ever even be completed. Called the Corps of Discovery. Another waste of government money.


----------



## Revere

If that's the case, it took 50 years before semiconductors were prevalent enough to impact society.


----------



## Old Rocks

Damn, Revere, are you truly that stupid?


----------



## Revere

Can the existing personal transportation requirement be met with an electric grid from those sources?


----------



## Revere

Old Rocks said:


> Damn, Revere, are you truly that stupid?



Are you conceding it will be 50 years until your "clean energy" pipe dreams may be realized?


----------



## Big Fitz

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I presumed what I consider simple knowledge, common knowledge, know to all or most here, so I apologize if I was curt, to put it mildly. I should of offered more information, better now, then never.
> 
> So here goes.
> 
> Solar is put in the desert where it is real hot in the summer, very dry which means little water.
> 
> A desert is also full of rock, sand, dirt, deposits of minerals, open mines of minerals, minerals on the ground. Everything is real dirty, it is kind of like the desert is made of sand, hundreds and hundreds of miles of sand and rock, and dirt, minerals, even plants and the dust from plants that die.
> 
> If you have never been in the desert you can trust me when I tell you its a dirty place, there are even giant hills of sand, it gets blown in big hills we call dunes, for miles, and miles, some places have old volcanoes, there are rocks that are uplifted from the ground, things with many layers of different rock and dirty and deposits of minerals in wavy lines, in straight lines.
> 
> You can find big rocks, little rocks, rocks that can make you rich.
> 
> The desert is just a giant place with sand and rocks.
> 
> Think of the desert as a place that your mom would not want you to play in because you would get your school clothes dirty.
> 
> Think of the desert as a place that if you left your car out there it would get real dirty very fast, in month easy, and if you did not wash off the sand, dirty, mineral deposit on every shiny part of your car you would destroy the paint.
> 
> Now imagine that light coating baked into the surface of your car, left there for months, withing a short period that paint on your car is destroyed.
> 
> I wonder what a little Mojave Hell dust and sand whipped up by a storm will do to nice, shiny, perfect, little, wonder, solar panels, manufactured in a clean environment to exacting standards, as perfect a process as billions of dollars of stolen tax dollars. Solar panels researched and developed with my tax dollars for someone else to get rich. Solar panels designed in public funded universities, designed with super computers to get amazing performance.
> 
> The shine has something to do with a simple condition needed to convert sunlight to energy. Thats all, no shine and it really does deteriorate rapidly.
> 
> The damage is done almost immediately, no responsible operator will allow damage to expensive equipment, remember, it is not disputed that solar power is some of the most expensive and easily damaged equipment used for electricity.
> 
> Everyone cleans their car, I cant believe people could possibly not know expensive equipment in the desert will get dirty, sometimes filthy, and due to the harsh conditions will be permanently damaged if not cleaned immediately.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> actually deserts are remarkably clean and free of dust. Downright sterile, skies as clear as any place I have ever seen and I have seen half the world.
> 
> Farmland is dusty. Very, very dusty.
Click to expand...

As one who grew up helping out on my grandparents dairy farm... y'all are fulla shit, hoss.  Farmland dust has NOTHING on deserts.  I hear it's something to do with not having any rain for months or years on end.  Crazy shit like that.  

Farms CAN be dusty on occasion... but nothing like a desert.  Why is it you see people in desert environments investing in goggles and face masks?  Dust. 

Ever hear of a sand storm?  How about the Santa Ana's?  They're not just hot winds.  They're dry and dust laden.

No wonder you believe in Global warming.


----------



## loosecannon

Big Fitz said:


> As one who grew up helping out on my grandparents dairy farm... y'all are fulla shit, hoss.  Farmland dust has NOTHING on deserts.  I hear it's something to do with not having any rain for months or years on end.  Crazy shit like that.
> 
> Farms CAN be dusty on occasion... but nothing like a desert.  Why is it you see people in desert environments investing in goggles and face masks?  Dust.
> 
> Ever hear of a sand storm?  How about the Santa Ana's?  They're not just hot winds.  They're dry and dust laden.
> 
> No wonder you believe in Global warming.



I have lived in the desert, dudette, and I don't believe in global warming.

But thanks for proving yourself dead wrong.

BTW have you ever been to the desert or just fantasized about what they must be like?

Earth to MORON: Sand isn't dust. Try to google up an image of the desert where the skies are not clear. 

And Santa Ana's are not dusty winds. at least not until they reach Urbania. You just have no clue.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Yes CO2 impacts, California's version of cap and trade, tax all forms of fossil energy and raise the rates of electricity.
> 
> Try again,



Why try again, you were 100% wrong and I astutely pointed that out. Electrical rates have nothing to do with that plant closing. 

Nothing.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Traveled across half the world and never saw a dust devil in the desert, never even heard of a dust storm in the Desert.



Yup, in fact I have seen far, far more dust devils in the Williamette valley of rainy, farmy OREGON Than I ever saw after living in the desert for years. 

Earth to fool: dust is clay, not sand.


----------



## loosecannon

Charles_Main said:


> Apparently you have never driven from Phoenix to LA Or anywhere in New Mexico. The road is peppered with signs warning about Dust storms and advising you do not drive through them and do not stop along the road in them.
> 
> Similar signs can be found through out the Desert SW of the US.



I lived in all of those places.



> The wind in northern Arizona is older than Meteor Crater, *but the blinding dust storms that have crippled nearby Interstate 40 are new*.
> 
> That dust blasts out of the desert in billowing walls, blinding drivers and shutting down about 30 miles of interstate east of Flagstaff for hours, leaving thousands stranded each time.
> 
> *Until last year, Highway Patrol officials had never closed I-40, but they have shut down the east-west artery 10 times this spring, including twice on May 22-23.*
> 
> *The full picture of what's causing the dust storms remains a mystery.* There have been more frequent days of winds upward of 45 mph, but state and weather officials say that doesn't explain why it is kicking up so much grit.
> 
> "That's the million-dollar question: Where is it coming from, and how do you stop it?" said Mackenzie Nuño, an Arizona Department of Transportation spokeswoman.
> 
> Whatever the answer, the effect has been nothing but misery for motorists.
> 
> *From 2000 through 2008, the state Department of Public Safety logged no dust-related collisions between Milepost 215, east of Flagstaff, and Milepost 260, just east of Winslow*. Last year, Highway Patrol cars responded to 11 such accidents, and so far this year, five.




Read more: Officials baffled by intense dust storms on I-40

See! It is extremely rare, even a mystery when dust storms occur in the SW!


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes CO2 impacts, California's version of cap and trade, tax all forms of fossil energy and raise the rates of electricity.
> 
> Try again,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why try again, you were 100% wrong and I astutely pointed that out. Electrical rates have nothing to do with that plant closing.
> 
> Nothing.
Click to expand...


So, sorry I wrote so fast, maybe you could read slower, take a deep breath. 

The American Spectator : California?s Green Nightmare



> A Riverside construction company, CalPortland Cement, announced in late 2009 it was closing its plant because of AB 32's impending regulations.





> Last year, researchers at the college of business at California State University in Sacramento estimated that higher energy prices from AB 32 will increase consumers' food, utility, and housing costs by $50 billion. That's the equivalent of a 4.5 percent sales tax on most consumer items Californians buy. Small business costs would rise by $60 billion annually to pay for a policy that will have at best a microscopic impact on global temperatures


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I did not make it clear that the cement company was moving due to electrical rates being too high. AB 32 is stated it the article, that is California's climate change law that mandates the kind of electricity I will use, let me re-word that, the government is dictating exactly what source electricity will come from, California is dictating the price, California is forcing the people to pay more money for electricity at the same time California is taxing us at a higher rate and giving my money to their friends who own the Green Energy companies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> actually no.
> 
> The article did not say that the plant was shutting down because it's electrical rates would increase. In fact it said that the plant would close due to it's CO2 impacts. Cement manufacture requires lots of energy in the form of heat, but more importantly the chemistry involved in the process produces vast quantities of CO2.
> 
> You just assumed otherwise. I read the article, you should try that.
Click to expand...


You read the article, I take this statement as the truth, thank you for telling the truth

Quote the portion of the article that states, " the plant would close due to it's CO2 impacts." 

Anyhow, I await another response or maybe you will ignore the post.

Loosecannon, where are you on the electrical rates, seeing how you gave up quickly I will count that as another point for me, 

Water is still the number one Solar Killer and thus far you ignore the pictures of dust from the desert, you ignore the picture of the dust devil, your response is the desert has sand. 

Water, not one person can dispute the obstacle of water, valid is the post that points out cost can be passed on to consumers, which means higher taxes, borrowing against the future to fund the budget, subsidy to the solar plant in the form of water, scarce resource taken from the people given to the rich for profit.

Solar is dead, Water is the issue.


----------



## mdn2000

How about these neat photos I just took, Phoenix or Los Angeles, guess what is between me and home, looks like a lot of desert. Imagine, the seriousness of the topic compared to the argument made by the proponents of Green Energy such as Solar.

I literally have to go outside and take photos, from this post to my next. 

I can and have taken photos of everything I speak of, I am in Phoenix today, San Bernardino County by Thursday. 

No need to argue about sand, dust, dirt, and minerals that make up the extreme environment of the desert, no facts have been presented.

Dust, Dirt, and Minerals in the desert, that is one

Water, that is two

Cement plants and energy costs, that is three.

Electrical rates, that is four 

That is four points you have lost. 

Solar is Dead, Water is the #1 obstacle.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes CO2 impacts, California's version of cap and trade, tax all forms of fossil energy and raise the rates of electricity.
> 
> Try again,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why try again, you were 100% wrong and I astutely pointed that out. Electrical rates have nothing to do with that plant closing.
> 
> Nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, sorry I wrote so fast, maybe you could read slower, take a deep breath.
> 
> The American Spectator : California?s Green Nightmare
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Riverside construction company, CalPortland Cement, announced in late 2009 it was closing its plant because of AB 32's impending regulations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Last year, researchers at the college of business at California State University in Sacramento estimated that higher energy prices from AB 32 will increase consumers' food, utility, and housing costs by $50 billion. That's the equivalent of a 4.5 percent sales tax on most consumer items Californians buy. Small business costs would rise by $60 billion annually to pay for a policy that will have at best a microscopic impact on global temperatures
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


But you still don't get it, the costs of electricity are NOT what is causing the cement plant to close. READ you article.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Quote the portion of the article that states, " the plant would close due to it's CO2 impacts."



You already quoted that part 3 times and you still do not understand it.




mdn2000 said:


> Loosecannon, where are you on the electrical rates, seeing how you gave up quickly I will count that as another point for me,



CA rates are 7th highest in the nation. 




mdn2000 said:


> Water, not one person can dispute the obstacle of water



It's been disputed, you are just daft.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Dust, Dirt, and Minerals in the desert, that is one
> 
> Water, that is two
> 
> Cement plants and energy costs, that is three.
> 
> Electrical rates, that is four
> 
> That is four points you have lost.
> 
> Solar is Dead, Water is the #1 obstacle.



you were wrong about all of those.

Earth to fool: dirt on the ground is not dust, dust is airborne.


----------



## mdn2000

So know facts presented, complete denial, Loosecannon, how much do I pay for electricity, what you posted as my cost was wrong, I gave you the link and posted the rate schedule, what you posted as the rate I pay is wrong, if that rate is wrong how is your post correct about anything concerning what I pay. 

The document you posted in which you got 7th from is wrong about the rate I pay for electricity, its much too low. I pay more. You have gall to tell me I pay less.

On water you state you can catch all you need on site yet not one site can supply all its needs, you read a headline and post an article, go to the project environmental impact study, many are online. 
Water is not my opinion, its fact, lawsuits are happening right now, the solar farms have subsidy money in which to offset the detrimental impact the solar plant will have on local water.

http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/abengoa/documents/applicant/2010-06-01_Applicants_Opening_Testimony_TN-56970.pdf



> Abengoa Solar Inc.
> Mojave Solar Project
> 09-AFC-5
> Applicant&#8217;s Opening Testimony
> Submitted to the
> California Energy Commission
> Submitted by
> Abengoa Solar Inc.
> June 1, 2010



Water is the issue, Solar is dead, where do you get the water, base it in reality, here is one project,
They may win, buy someone off with the subsidy money, which is my money, taken from me, given to the rich.

Loosecannon claims the water issue is solved because loosecannon says it is but when confronted with links to the public departments where we can read every relevant document loosecannon simply claims because loosecannon says so, water is not a problem.

Water is an obstacle that can not be moved, it may be bought for a little time, Obama did give billions of dollars to Solar companies so they can buy their way out of trouble.

Here is a project, tell us how the issue is resolved by rain gutters. 

My electrical rate, tell me what it is, you volunteered one rate which was wrong, you think california is 7th based on a document you posted which listed an incorrect figure as the rate I pay.

On top of these huge errors of understanding on your part you claim there are no dust devils near these solar farms, there are no dust storms, you know nothing of the desert.

I just posted a picture of dust I picked up off the ground, right off of I-10 as seen in the sign in the photo I posted, and you still present a feeble argument, feeble is being kind to you.

Solar is dead

Loosecannon loses on this point in this thread. 

Why else would Loosecannon ignore this post at the same time claiming he is right in a later post.


----------



## Old Rocks

You can today buy solar laminates that you paste on whatever you choose. At less than a dollar a watt. The technology is advancing rapidly on two fronts. Creation of very cheap panels, the goal a dollar a watt or less. And increasing efficiency by changing the materials that we use. From q-dots to graphene, the goal for efficiency has moved from 20%+, already acheived, to 50% and even higher. 

And the people manufacturing Solar cannot keep up with demand. Solar is not only alive, it is thriving and growing at an astounding rate.


----------



## Old Rocks

*Just one company*

First Solar Planning U.S. Manufacturing Plant That Would Add 600 New Jobs

Earlier this year the company also completed an expansion of its Perrysburg, Ohio, manufacturing plant, which serves as First Solar's primary hub for engineering, research and development. The Perrysburg operation employs more than 1,100 of First Solar's 1,500-plus U.S.-based workers. First Solar said the new plants, combined with the previously announced expansions, will nearly double its production capacity from 1.4 gigawatts in 2010 to more than 2.7 gigawatts in 2012.


----------



## Old Rocks

And if you really want to see what is going on worldwide concerning the increasing use and manufacture of solar power

Solar Energy Manufacturing News Summary


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> So know facts presented, complete denial, Loosecannon, how much do I pay for electricity, what you posted as my cost was wrong, I gave you the link and posted the rate schedule, what you posted as the rate I pay is wrong, if that rate is wrong how is your post correct about anything concerning what I pay.



I am sorry dude, but the rates I posted were a week old and came from a US government source. My personal elect rates are higher too, but that hardly matters. 

You keep harping about some victory about 5 successive points.

BUT YOU WERE WRONG IN EACH CASE!

Maybe you should just argue with yourself. You might win that argument. 

Meanwhile you are so boring that I can't even read 1/12th of what you post. 

You think solar is dead, and you are always wrong. 

Nuf sed.


----------



## Zander

Solar is dead?? Hmm...

cow farts are destroying the earth!!!






unless.......


----------



## mdn2000

Water is the number one obstacle to Solar Power.

There is a way around this, massive government subsidies, government mandates, government regulations, government taxes on competition, government mandates higher electrical rates charged to families, the largest users of electricity.

One thing Loosecannon refused to do was address electrical rates, loosecannon did post a rate that was wrong, what loosecannon refused to do was show how expensive electricity is and how that cost is now only because of solar and wind power.

I linked the page directly to Southern California Edison that explains rates, Loosecannon could not correct his mistake thus it seems Loosecannon ignored the post and the link. Loosecannon failed to correct his post, my point of the expense of solar power stands. 

Cost kills Solar, Solar power is dead


----------



## Big Fitz

> I have lived in the desert, dudette





Get together with your other desert denizens who decide to disagree, dip.


----------



## Old Rocks

Yep, solar is so dead that Oregon will soon be producing gigawatts of solar cells.

Solar power in Oregon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## mdn2000

Mandated by law, higher electrical rates mandated by law, and this is just the beginning. No problem the entire left coast is a welfare state, the cost passed on to the rest of the nation as well as higher electrical rates for the people of Oregon. 

Talk about progress, pay more for less, 

Renewable Energy Costs You, Whether You Like It or Not - The Oregon Catalyst



> by Todd Wynn    Friday, March 12. 2010
> Portland General Electric (PGE) customers may have noticed something new on their bills recently. Last month, a â&#8364;&#339;renewable resource adjustmentâ&#8364; was added to electricity bills to pay for additional renewable resources like wind power. Even if you are not enrolled in the Green Power Program, all PGE customers are forced to pay for renewable energy. According to PGE, ratepayers can thank their legislators for this added electricity cost.
> 
> In 2007, Oregon legislators passed a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), forcing major utilities to procure 25% of their electricity from new renewable resources by 2025. With much fanfare, Governor Kulongoski claimed that this would be â&#8364;&#339;protecting ratepayers with more stable and predictable utility rates.â&#8364; Environment Oregon also claimed that ratepayers will save money by having utilities invest in wind energy instead of in fossil fuels. They were wrong.


----------



## JiggsCasey

not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale? 

Big fan of heavy oils, are you?


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Water is the number one obstacle to Solar Power.



solar requires next to no water.






mdn2000 said:


> One thing Loosecannon refused to do was address electrical rates, loosecannon did post a rate that was wrong, what loosecannon refused to do was show how expensive electricity is and how that cost is now only because of solar and wind power.



I posted a current US government report. far more credible than you and the links you post but don't know how to read. 



mdn2000 said:


> I linked the page directly to Southern California Edison that explains rates, Loosecannon could not correct his mistake thus it seems Loosecannon ignored the post and the link. Loosecannon failed to correct his post, my point of the expense of solar power stands.



However you have a proven disability to read and understand your links so nobody takes you seriously. 
Admit that the power plant in CA was not closed due to electrical rates and you might be worth a few minutes of time/day.

Otherwise, stop lying.


----------



## loosecannon

Big Fitz said:


> I have lived in the desert, dudette
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get together with your other desert denizens who decide to disagree, dip.
Click to expand...


OK so everybody doesn't agree. I posted a link that says the AZ dept of transpo considers dust storms freak events that they can't explain. 

Whatchu got?


----------



## loosecannon

JiggsCasey said:


> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?



Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?


----------



## mdn2000

JiggsCasey said:


> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?



I like light sweat crude, its more economical to develop. I need to know more about the chemical characteristics of oil, I have a two volume set of books on oil I just begun reading, I am only up to 1850 when bio-fuel was developed, turning plant oil to a usable product is older technology than refining petroleum. 

Our energy policy should be to develop and use the most economical energy, today that is light sweet crude. 

Unfortunately we need more oil to meet the rapid rise in demand for wind farms. Without more petroleum production we cannot build wind farms. We must use oil faster then before in order to meet demand, at that we do not have the production capacity to meet the demand for production of the raw materials and energy needed to build Wind farms as well as Solar farms.

If its economically competitive without subsidies, than that is what we should use.

At the same time research the technology we would use to make Heavy Crude more competitive.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
Click to expand...


Downside to Venezuela, Marxism, those fields we developed and sub-sequentially were "taken" from the rightful owners to become state property.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water is the number one obstacle to Solar Power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> solar requires next to no water.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> One thing Loosecannon refused to do was address electrical rates, loosecannon did post a rate that was wrong, what loosecannon refused to do was show how expensive electricity is and how that cost is now only because of solar and wind power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I posted a current US government report. far more credible than you and the links you post but don't know how to read.
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I linked the page directly to Southern California Edison that explains rates, Loosecannon could not correct his mistake thus it seems Loosecannon ignored the post and the link. Loosecannon failed to correct his post, my point of the expense of solar power stands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> However you have a proven disability to read and understand your links so nobody takes you seriously.
> Admit that the power plant in CA was not closed due to electrical rates and you might be worth a few minutes of time/day.
> 
> Otherwise, stop lying.
Click to expand...


Prove it, you run your mouth and ignore your links, as in the wind power thread of yours, I challenge you to support your link, I challenge you to go to the thread and put your money where your mouth is.

I linked to Southern California Edison, how are links to politicians more credible than the utility I pay, how are politicians and government links more credible than my actual bill? You wont answer this.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water is the number one obstacle to Solar Power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> solar requires next to no water.
> 
> I posted a current US government report. far more credible than you and the links you post but don't know how to read.
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I linked the page directly to Southern California Edison that explains rates, Loosecannon could not correct his mistake thus it seems Loosecannon ignored the post and the link. Loosecannon failed to correct his post, my point of the expense of solar power stands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...


You just proved you do not read, the first link I posted is the following, notice that it is a .gov site. My link is to a government report and you are stating government reports are more credible than anything else, so you make my point.

Loosecannon, you are great, as in the Wind Power thread, you were wrong and proved you were wrong. Loosecannon again proves he is wrong, imagine, stating its the government reports that are the most credible, and this threads first link making the point solar is dead is to a government report.

Solar is dead, loosecannon states "Government reports are more credible", loosecannon affirms the truth and accuracy of my premise and assertion that Solar is dead


----------



## mdn2000

> Loosecannon:I posted a current US government report. far more credible than you and the links you post but don't know how to read



Can you read, take a look at my government link to a government report.




mdn2000 said:


> Thats right, Solar is dead, non sustainable.
> 
> Seems someone forgot about the lack of water in the Arizona and California desert
> 
> http://ndep.nv.gov/news/temp_news/water093009.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> September 30, 2009
> Alternative Energy Projects Stumble on a
> Need for Water
> By TODD WOODY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMARGOSA VALLEY, Nev.  In a rural corner of Nevada reeling from the recession,
> a bit of salvation seemed to arrive last year. A German developer, Solar Millennium,
> announced plans to build two large solar farms here that would harness the sun to
> generate electricity, creating hundreds of jobs.
> But then things got messy. The company revealed that its preferred method of cooling the
> power plants would consume 1.3 billion gallons of water a year, about 20 percent of this
> desert valleys available water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, solar developers have already been forced to switch to less water-intensive
> technologies when local officials have refused to turn on the tap. Other big solar projects
> are mired in disputes with state regulators over water consumption.
> To date, the flashpoint for such conflicts has been the Southwest, where dozens of
> multibillion-dollar solar power plants are planned for thousands of acres of desert.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that is sufficient to begin. All solar power plants consume water, at the very least each plant must keep the mirrors or collectors clean of dust, there is a lot of dust in the desert. The water required to clean one solar power plant is millions of gallons of water.
> 
> Add the drought in California, the over use of the Colorado river, depleting the aquifers, the better use of water in agricultural food production.
> 
> Solar energy is dead.
Click to expand...


----------



## JiggsCasey

loosecannon said:


> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
Click to expand...


I'm asking because shale requires an enormous amount of water in the extraction process. He's claiming so much water is required for solar, ... well, water requirement is also one of the many reasons shale is not viable either. Unless, perhaps, they can figure out a way to redirect the Colorado river or something.


----------



## mdn2000

JiggsCasey said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm asking because shale requires an enormous amount of water in the extraction process. He's claiming so much water is required for solar, ... well, water requirement is also one of the many reasons shale is not viable either. Unless, perhaps, they can figure out a way to redirect the Colorado river or something.
Click to expand...


No disagreement here, if this was your post I missed sorry, its a good point and that is what should be compared, the cost of water for any specific project. I am against government funding projects to bring or give water to corporations looking for a water subsidy.

Water subsidies are some the biggest if not the biggest subsidies corporations benefit from. 

Remember boys and girls, wikipedia is not a source, links to wikipedia must be handled with caution and extreme care. For this purpose, to establish the name and author of some of the knowledge I have attained so that I can pass this on to those who wish to learn I provide a great source of information, history, and fact on the subject of water in the west.

Some may of seen the PBS documentary.

Cadillac Desert - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Cadillac Desert
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> This article is about the book. For the documentary, see Cadillac Desert (film).
> Cadillac Desert, by Marc Reisner, is a 1986 book published by Viking (ISBN 0-14-017824-4) about land development and water policy in the western United States. Subtitled The American West and its Disappearing Water, it gives the history of the Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and their struggle to remake the American West. The book's main conclusion is that development-driven policies, formed when settling the West was the country's main concern, are having serious long-term negative effects on the environment and water quantity. The book was revised and updated in 1993.
> 
> A four-part television documentary based on the revised book was produced by KTEH-TV, the PBS affiliate in San Jose, California, in 1996. The parts are entitled Mulhollands Dream, An American Nile, The Mercy of Nature, and The Last Oasis.


----------



## editec

uscitizen said:


> Green energy works, just replace a bulldozer with 100 men with shovels!
> 
> Luddites RULE!


 
Yeah but those men (the selfish bastards!) will demand water too.

There's a Methusian solution to mankinds energy problems, though.




 
A nice particularly effective plauge would solve mankind's energy problem and a whole host of other problems (social and economic) waiting in the wings, too.

Not to put down technological advances and market solutions, of course.

In good times those two forces can kill excess mankind _very effectively_.

But neither of them is really capable of solving mankinds looming energy (and other) problems quickly enough.

Hey before you guys dismiss this as some kind of joke, be aware that the world we live in today, the world of modern capitalism that we all think is pretty neat, would never have come to pass had not our good friends_ ratus ratus_ been generous enough to to share _Yersinia pestis_, with us.

We'd still be some kind of feudal society where the vast majority of us never used money had it not been for our friends the rats, and their delightfully effective social problem solving bubonic plague, folks.

Historically speaking _Yersinia pestis_ has probably done more to hekp mankind change its destiny than all the inventiveness and scholarship mankind has _ever _discovered.


----------



## mdn2000

Water and Solar, anyone who thinks Solar is the solution must answer can Solar provide the electricity to pump water. That answer is no.

Solar Power cannot provide the electricity to pump water, Solar Power is dead.

http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/EPRI-Volume-4.pdf



> Electricity Consumption Projections
> The baseline regional electricity consumption projections for supply of fresh water by public
> water supply agencies is shown graphically in Figure 2-2 and in tabular form in the Appendix.
> Electricity consumption is estimated at about 30 billion kWh for the year 2000. This is expected
> to reach about 36 billion kWh by the year 2020 and 46 billion kWh by 2050.


----------



## edthecynic

mdn2000 said:


> Water and Solar, anyone who thinks Solar is the solution must answer can Solar provide the electricity to pump water. That answer is no.
> 
> Solar Power cannot provide the electricity to pump water, Solar Power is dead.
> 
> http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/EPRI-Volume-4.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity Consumption Projections
> The baseline regional electricity consumption projections for supply of fresh water by public
> water supply agencies is shown graphically in Figure 2-2 and in tabular form in the Appendix.
> Electricity consumption is estimated at about 30 billion kWh for the year 2000. This is expected
> to reach about 36 billion kWh by the year 2020 and 46 billion kWh by 2050.
Click to expand...

So if solar can't provide the energy to pump and treat ALL the water supply in the US then it can't pump enough water to rinse off some dust on its panels. BRILLIANT!!!!


----------



## Big Fitz

loosecannon said:


> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
Click to expand...

they screw up his faith.  That's the downside.  Technology to extract and efficiently refine non-perfect oils peaked in the 1970's in his mind.


----------



## mdn2000

edthecynic said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Water and Solar, anyone who thinks Solar is the solution must answer can Solar provide the electricity to pump water. That answer is no.
> 
> Solar Power cannot provide the electricity to pump water, Solar Power is dead.
> 
> http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/EPRI-Volume-4.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity Consumption Projections
> The baseline regional electricity consumption projections for supply of fresh water by public
> water supply agencies is shown graphically in Figure 2-2 and in tabular form in the Appendix.
> Electricity consumption is estimated at about 30 billion kWh for the year 2000. This is expected
> to reach about 36 billion kWh by the year 2020 and 46 billion kWh by 2050.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if solar can't provide the energy to pump and treat ALL the water supply in the US then it can't pump enough water to rinse off some dust on its panels. BRILLIANT!!!!
Click to expand...


That is not the point I made, its just the beginning, like this, can solar be used to pump water just in the states where solar is located. That is a better question, or can Solar be used to provide just the increase in energy needed every year. On top of that can Solar provide electricity for its own manufacturing, on both points it fails.

California wants high speed rail, can solar power high speed rail.


----------



## JiggsCasey

Big Fitz said:


> they screw up his faith.  That's the downside.  Technology to extract and efficiently refine non-perfect oils peaked in the 1970's in his mind.



Show where I ever once said that, you unrivaled forum fraud.

What I said was that U.S. domestic production of light crude peaked in 1970-1971. That's a documented fact.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like light sweat crude, its more economical to develop. I need to know more about the chemical characteristics of oil, I have a two volume set of books on oil I just begun reading, I am only up to 1850 when bio-fuel was developed, turning plant oil to a usable product is older technology than refining petroleum.
> 
> Our energy policy should be to develop and use the most economical energy, today that is light sweet crude.
Click to expand...


You admit to not knowing anything about oil but assume to know that we should use the cheapest oil available? As if there were no other considerations? 

You are very young and dumb no doubt. 

Earth to mdn: light sweet crude is almost gone. Heavy sour and worse is most of what is left to exploit.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Downside to Venezuela, Marxism, those fields we developed and sub-sequentially were "taken" from the rightful owners to become state property.
Click to expand...


You mean purchased, and the oil companies didn't bitch about the price.  Grow up.


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> Prove it, you run your mouth and ignore your links, as in the wind power thread of yours,



I haven't looked at that thread in a week. If you posted anything I am sure it isn't worth reading. 




mdn2000 said:


> I linked to Southern California Edison, how are links to politicians more credible than the utility I pay, how are politicians and government links more credible than my actual bill? You wont answer this.




are you retarded? Links to a US government site ranking national utility costs are as good as it gets. And it simply makes no difference if your own personal rate is higher, so is mine, but the state average is what counts. 

Your bill doesn't reflect the state average so it is worthless. 

And you can't even understand the links that you post. 

The cement plant that you posted about did not close because of electrical rates, the link said so explicitly. You just can not understand the article.


----------



## loosecannon

JiggsCasey said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm asking because shale requires an enormous amount of water in the extraction process. He's claiming so much water is required for solar, ... well, water requirement is also one of the many reasons shale is not viable either. Unless, perhaps, they can figure out a way to redirect the Colorado river or something.
Click to expand...


Thanks. Fresh water is wasted by the cubic acre in ordinary oil drilling exploits.


----------



## loosecannon

editec said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> 
> Green energy works, just replace a bulldozer with 100 men with shovels!
> 
> Luddites RULE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but those men (the selfish bastards!) will demand water too.
> 
> There's a Methusian solution to mankinds energy problems, though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A nice particularly effective plauge would solve mankind's energy problem and a whole host of other problems (social and economic) waiting in the wings, too.
> 
> Not to put down technological advances and market solutions, of course.
> 
> In good times those two forces can kill excess mankind _very effectively_.
> 
> But neither of them is really capable of solving mankinds looming energy (and other) problems quickly enough.
> 
> Hey before you guys dismiss this as some kind of joke, be aware that the world we live in today, the world of modern capitalism that we all think is pretty neat, would never have come to pass had not our good friends_ ratus ratus_ been generous enough to to share _Yersinia pestis_, with us.
> 
> We'd still be some kind of feudal society where the vast majority of us never used money had it not been for our friends the rats, and their delightfully effective social problem solving bubonic plague, folks.
> 
> Historically speaking _Yersinia pestis_ has probably done more to hekp mankind change its destiny than all the inventiveness and scholarship mankind has _ever _discovered.
Click to expand...


your link redirects to "page not found".


----------



## loosecannon

mdn2000 said:


> California wants high speed rail, can solar power high speed rail.



of course it can. Are you mentally ill?


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it, you run your mouth and ignore your links, as in the wind power thread of yours,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't looked at that thread in a week. If you posted anything I am sure it isn't worth reading.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I linked to Southern California Edison, how are links to politicians more credible than the utility I pay, how are politicians and government links more credible than my actual bill? You wont answer this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> are you retarded? Links to a US government site ranking national utility costs are as good as it gets. And it simply makes no difference if your own personal rate is higher, so is mine, but the state average is what counts.
> 
> Your bill doesn't reflect the state average so it is worthless.
> 
> And you can't even understand the links that you post.
> 
> The cement plant that you posted about did not close because of electrical rates, the link said so explicitly. You just can not understand the article.
Click to expand...


No, a government site is not as good as it gets, especially when I post the rates that the utility charges, its that simple, I post the rates of the utility and you claim the government rate which is half of what I pay is good, your either a moron or an asshole with an ideology non-conducive to living liberty.

The state average is not what counts, and the rate you posted is not the state average, not at all. I pay at least twice that much for electricity.

Since this thread began I have been in Arizona, if you noticed the pictures of desert you ignore, I am in the Phoenix desert, I have taken a survey, just last night, I asked people what they pay in electricity for I know, a woman last spring when I was here stated her electric bill is 400$ in summer, yesterday three people, a single man stated 200$, another man stated 350$ a month, a woman stated 550$ a month in summer.

Are they all liars as well, should they accept your post that they pay less.

I pay more than you stated, twice as much. The government is not more accurate than my bill.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> California wants high speed rail, can solar power high speed rail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> of course it can. Are you mentally ill?
Click to expand...



Your arguing about dust and dirt in the desert, of course everyone else seems mental when you can not grasp that there is dust and sand in the desert. 

You lived in the desert, bullshit, your a liar, if your not a liar your a political troll spreading detrimental propaganda.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm asking because shale requires an enormous amount of water in the extraction process. He's claiming so much water is required for solar, ... well, water requirement is also one of the many reasons shale is not viable either. Unless, perhaps, they can figure out a way to redirect the Colorado river or something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks. Fresh water is wasted by the cubic acre in ordinary oil drilling exploits.
Click to expand...


Yes, that is correct, and demand has increased for oil to make solar panels so you have stated another hidden environmental impact of solar.


----------



## mdn2000

JiggsCasey said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JiggsCasey said:
> 
> 
> 
> not sure if you answered, mdn, but how do you feel about Bakken oil shale?
> 
> Big fan of heavy oils, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should elaborate. Venezuela has extensive reserves of heavy sour crude that they are exploiting. What's the downside?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm asking because shale requires an enormous amount of water in the extraction process. He's claiming so much water is required for solar, ... well, water requirement is also one of the many reasons shale is not viable either. Unless, perhaps, they can figure out a way to redirect the Colorado river or something.
Click to expand...


your right, and again as I stated to loosecannon, that oil goes to produce solar panels and pump water to solar power plants in the desert, this is the hidden impact of Solar energy.


----------



## Old Rocks

Now mdn, would you care to demonstrate where this solar plant uses water?

http://www.power-technology.com/projects/victorville/


----------



## Old Rocks

*And in what manner do these photovoltaic panels use water when generating electricity?*

First Solar Sells 30 Megawatt Solar Photovoltaic Power Project to Southern Company and Turner Renewable Energy | Renewable Energy Sources - Photovoltaic, Geothermal, Wind Plus Much More

TEMPE, Ariz., Mar 15, 2010 (BUSINESS WIRE) &#8212; First Solar, Inc. (Nasdaq:FSLR) today announced it has sold a 30 megawatt (AC) photovoltaic solar power project to Southern Company (NYSE:SO) and Turner Renewable Energy. Financial terms of the transaction were not disclosed.

The Cimarron I Solar Project is adjacent to the Vermejo Park Ranch in northern New Mexico. First Solar developed the project and is providing engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) services. First Solar will also provide operation and maintenance services under a 25-year contract. The facility will supply power to approximately 9,000 homes, or 18,000 residents, and displace over 45,000 tons of CO2 per year.

"The Cimarron I project is yet another example of First Solar&#8217;s capability to realize utility-scale solar projects," said Rob Gillette, First Solar chief executive officer. "Combining the required technology, manufacturing, project development and EPC expertise enables First Solar to be a leader in sustainable energy development."


----------



## Old Rocks

Of course, if you use reflective mirrors to heat water to steam, then you need water. At first. In a desert, you don't just vent the water vapor to the atmosphere, you recover it. So the use of water after the initial startup is very small.

Of course, such a simple peice of engineering is beyond mdn's capability to imagine.


----------



## loosecannon

Old Rocks said:


> Now mdn, would you care to demonstrate where this solar plant uses water?
> 
> Victorville Solar Power Generating Station, California - Power Technology



Why bother with him, Rocks, he's plumb loco. And he apparently doesn't realize it, which makes this hilarious.


----------



## loosecannon

Old Rocks said:


> Of course, if you use reflective mirrors to heat water to steam, then you need water. At first. In a desert, you don't just vent the water vapor to the atmosphere, you recover it. So the use of water after the initial startup is very small.
> 
> Of course, such a simple peice of engineering is beyond mdn's capability to imagine.



He was already confronted with just such a power plant or 7 in CA and he still insisted furiously that they need water and kill sacred endangered turtles. 

mdn is looney.


----------



## mdn2000

loosecannon said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, if you use reflective mirrors to heat water to steam, then you need water. At first. In a desert, you don't just vent the water vapor to the atmosphere, you recover it. So the use of water after the initial startup is very small.
> 
> Of course, such a simple peice of engineering is beyond mdn's capability to imagine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He was already confronted with just such a power plant or 7 in CA and he still insisted furiously that they need water and kill sacred endangered turtles.
> 
> mdn is looney.
Click to expand...


Looney, not much of an insult coming from a "Headline driven" fanatic.

Water is still the issue, if you look beyond headlines, look at the Environment Impact study.

http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/40025.pdf

Anyone with half a brain knows all Solar projects require water, given that they are building Solar on public land in the desert with scarce water, water is a huge factor.

Too bad people are hypocrites, ignorant hypocrites, for Solar Power farms consume massive amounts of natural resources during manufacturing of the panels, millions of tons of CO2 are released into the environment. 

Use more raw materials at a faster rate to make Solar Power plants which produce less energy from a larger amount of raw material, 

Solar, more in, less out.

Another Corporate/Government robbery, take from the public, give to the rich


----------



## mdn2000

Here is but one example of people addressing the issue of water use by Solar Power plants. Now if they could only address the destruction of hundreds of square miles of public land. I am not aware of any projects approved by Obama that are not giving public land to massive corporations. Take the newest Solar project approved, Chevron is being given public land, Chevron gets to destroy thousands of acres of land, not to mention Chevron will sell the oil used to manufacturer the solar panels.

A huge waste of natural resources, from silica to natural gas. 

Self-cleaning solar panel technology may make large-scale installations more feasible | Science Codex



> Self-cleaning solar panel technology may make large-scale installations more feasible
> 
> posted on: august 22, 2010 - 6:50pm
> 
> 
> BOSTON, Aug. 22, 2010 &#8212; Find dusting those tables a chore? Dread washing the windows? Imagine keeping dust and grime off objects spread out over an area of 25 to 50 football fields. That's the problem facing companies that deploy large-scale solar power installations, and scientists today presented development of one possible solution &#8212; self-dusting solar panels, based on technology developed for space missions to Mars.
> 
> In a report at American Chemical Society (ACS) meeting, they described how a self-cleaning coating on the surface of solar cells could increase the efficiency of producing electricity from sunlight and reduce maintenance costs for large-scale solar installations.


----------



## JiggsCasey

What's your solution to our undeniable energy crisis then?

A day will come when you, your kids, and your grandkids will WISH we put up the renewable infrastructure, costs be damned. 

Because any way you slice it, peak oil is here, and the global food conveyor belt that relies on cheap energy to function is slowly going away. Hope you know basic horticulture.


----------



## Old Rocks

Hell, mdn doesn't know basic anything.


----------



## Old Rocks

mdn2000 said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, if you use reflective mirrors to heat water to steam, then you need water. At first. In a desert, you don't just vent the water vapor to the atmosphere, you recover it. So the use of water after the initial startup is very small.
> 
> Of course, such a simple peice of engineering is beyond mdn's capability to imagine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He was already confronted with just such a power plant or 7 in CA and he still insisted furiously that they need water and kill sacred endangered turtles.
> 
> mdn is looney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Looney, not much of an insult coming from a "Headline driven" fanatic.
> 
> Water is still the issue, if you look beyond headlines, look at the Environment Impact study.
> 
> http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/40025.pdf
> 
> Anyone with half a brain knows all Solar projects require water, given that they are building Solar on public land in the desert with scarce water, water is a huge factor.
> 
> Too bad people are hypocrites, ignorant hypocrites, for Solar Power farms consume massive amounts of natural resources during manufacturing of the panels, millions of tons of CO2 are released into the environment.
> 
> Use more raw materials at a faster rate to make Solar Power plants which produce less energy from a larger amount of raw material,
> 
> Solar, more in, less out.
> 
> Another Corporate/Government robbery, take from the public, give to the rich
Click to expand...


Silly ass. Photovoltaic, thermal solar, even Stirling engines. None of these use water in the process of producing electricity.


----------



## Old Rocks

*Just for mdn;*
Biggest Solar Deal Ever Announced ? We&#8217;re Talking Gigawatts | Wired Science | Wired.com

The largest series of solar installations in history, more than 1,300 megawatts, is planned for the desert outside Los Angeles, according to a new deal between the utility Southern California Edison and solar power plant maker, BrightSource.

The momentous deal will deliver more electricity than even the largest nuclear plant, spread out among seven facilities, the first of which will start up in 2013. When fully operational, the companies say the facility will provide enough electricity to power 845,000 homes &#8212; more than exist in San Francisco &#8212; though estimates like that are notoriously squirrely. 

The technology isn&#8217;t the familiar photovoltaics &#8212; the direct conversion of sunlight into electricity &#8212; but solar thermal power, which concentrates the sun&#8217;s rays to create steam in a boiler and spin a turbine. 

"We do see solar as the large untapped resource, particularly in Southern California," said Stuart Hemphill, vice president of renewable energy and power at Southern California Edison. "It&#8217;s barely tapped and we&#8217;re eager to see it expand in our portfolio."



Read More Biggest Solar Deal Ever Announced ? We&#8217;re Talking Gigawatts | Wired Science | Wired.com

*Now this one does use water. Bet they recycle it. Water is not something you waste in California.*


----------



## Old Rocks

*Two Gigawatts of photovoltaic power for China. Hmmm......*

First Solar To Build 2-Gigawatt Solar Power Plant in China - Environmental Capital - WSJ

Solar-panel maker First Solar is cracking open the Chinese market, which could become one of the world&#8217;s most promising for solar power.


Arizona-based First Solar said today it signed a deal with Chinese officials to build a 2,000 megawatt solar-power plant in Inner Mongolia over the next decade at an estimated cost of $5 billion to $6 billion.

UPDATE: That figure is apparently what it would cost to build a similar plant in the U.S. today; building a large plant in China in the future would likely cost less, due to labor costs especially, say First Solar spokesmen.

For First Solar, which already has contracts to build smaller, though still utility-size, solar-power plants in the U.S., the Chinese deal could be a game-changer. &#8220;If you have two gigawatts, it could change the image of solar power from niche to nuclear-plant-size installations,&#8221; said First Solar chief executive Mike Ahearn in an interview.

The deal also shows, First Solar says, that China isn&#8217;t necessarily slamming the door on foreign competition in the clean-energy space. &#8220;I think they clearly want to be working with advanced technology and they&#8217;re looking for low-cost solutions,&#8221; Mr. Ahearn added.


----------



## Old Rocks

*By damn, solar seems to be flopping a lot to be considered dead.*

5 GigaWatt Solar Power Field To Be Built In South Africa | Solar Power

South Africa has recently unveiled plans for building world&#8217;s biggest solar energy park, which, according to officials, will be capable of producing about 5GW of clean electricity.

The country is more than 90% dependent on coal-fired power stations and one in six people still lacks electricity: &#8220;In South Africa over 90% of our power comes from the burning of coal and we need to reduce this because of our international obligations on climate change,&#8221; said Jonathan de Vries, the project manager


----------



## Old Rocks

FuturePundit: 2010 10 Gigawatts Solar Power Install Expected

June 14, 2010
2010 10 Gigawatts Solar Power Install Expected 
Eric Wesoff of Green Tech Media reports on their projection that well over 10 gigawatts of solar cells will be installed in 2010.


In 2010, we will cross the threshold of 10 gigawatts of photovoltaic solar installed globally in a single year -- a record-setting and once-inconceivable number.

Rewind to ten years ago: the total amount of photovoltaics installed in the year 2000 was 170 megawatts.  Since then, the solar photovoltaic industry has grown at a 51 percent annual growth rate, and 170 megawatts is now the size of a healthy utility installation or a small solar factory. 

Contrast that with 200 gigawatts of wind installation this year. Wind continues to far surpass solar power due to lower costs.


----------



## mdn2000

JiggsCasey said:


> What's your solution to our undeniable energy crisis then?
> 
> A day will come when you, your kids, and your grandkids will WISH we put up the renewable infrastructure, costs be damned.
> 
> Because any way you slice it, peak oil is here, and the global food conveyor belt that relies on cheap energy to function is slowly going away. Hope you know basic horticulture.



There is no renewable energy, its a canard, a false premise. The green energy people are proposing using natural resources at a faster rate to produce power plants that produce little to zero energy. 

Use oil faster, use more oil, to make more windmills, and when we run out of oil how do we make windmills. How is it a benefit, you make less energy using more, how does that make sense to you. Maybe we should start building more cars to save energy, never mind if we drove old cars longer that saves more energy than throwing away five hundred pound batteries every few years from our hybrid cars.

Take any generator from a wind farm, hook it up to a nuke power plant and you have saved energy, it is nothing but a waste of energy to make a solar panel that at best works a third of the time. Pure waste of the energy you wish to save.


----------



## mdn2000

Old Rocks said:


> Hell, mdn doesn't know basic anything.



Hey, remember that time you said you worked at a steel smelting plant that used only electricity and when I said you needed natural gas Old Crock said no, remember that, you posted a link to show I was wrong but Old Crock's link showed that you need natural gas to make steel. 

Or how about the time you said geothermal worked but one minor design flaw at a particular plant, then Old Crock linked to an article that was old that stated geothermal was going to recover precious metals and make a fortune, remember that, remember how the plant that was going to make millions was actually the same plant you stated had a design flaw, that was real funny, saying geothermal works, explaining how it did not in one case because of a design flaw, then unwittingly using the flawed plant as an example of a profit being made when the plant never operated.

Old Crock, you are a riot, how about that time you referenced a study except you could not link to the study because it was not wrote, again, to funny. 

I should check you links here, if I get bored.


----------



## mdn2000

Old Rocks said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> He was already confronted with just such a power plant or 7 in CA and he still insisted furiously that they need water and kill sacred endangered turtles.
> 
> mdn is looney.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looney, not much of an insult coming from a "Headline driven" fanatic.
> 
> Water is still the issue, if you look beyond headlines, look at the Environment Impact study.
> 
> http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/40025.pdf
> 
> Anyone with half a brain knows all Solar projects require water, given that they are building Solar on public land in the desert with scarce water, water is a huge factor.
> 
> Too bad people are hypocrites, ignorant hypocrites, for Solar Power farms consume massive amounts of natural resources during manufacturing of the panels, millions of tons of CO2 are released into the environment.
> 
> Use more raw materials at a faster rate to make Solar Power plants which produce less energy from a larger amount of raw material,
> 
> Solar, more in, less out.
> 
> Another Corporate/Government robbery, take from the public, give to the rich
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Silly ass. Photovoltaic, thermal solar, even Stirling engines. None of these use water in the process of producing electricity.
Click to expand...



Where is your link, of course they all use water, nothing is made without water. Everything at the very least needs to be cleaned, of course in addition to cleaning solar must be cooled, even the "dry" technologies use water, its just that they are not as wet as "wet" solar. 

Too bad they dont work, not commercially, seems a waste of natural resources, its like building a giant bus that is never used or is never full. 

Solar cannot even predict when they will be able to provide energy, that is why solar must have a 100% fossil fuel backup. Imagine, the energy company makes a profit on Solar and Fossil energy plants, they even get to sell the fossil energy at the cost of the more expensive solar energy. No wonder Chevron and Edison are backing solar energy. They double the profit and dont have to worry about the money to do it, we give it to them.


----------



## mdn2000

Old Rocks said:


> FuturePundit: 2010 10 Gigawatts Solar Power Install Expected
> 
> June 14, 2010
> 2010 10 Gigawatts Solar Power Install Expected
> Eric Wesoff of Green Tech Media reports on their projection that well over 10 gigawatts of solar cells will be installed in 2010.
> 
> 
> In 2010, we will cross the threshold of 10 gigawatts of photovoltaic solar installed globally in a single year -- a record-setting and once-inconceivable number.
> 
> Rewind to ten years ago: the total amount of photovoltaics installed in the year 2000 was 170 megawatts.  Since then, the solar photovoltaic industry has grown at a 51 percent annual growth rate, and 170 megawatts is now the size of a healthy utility installation or a small solar factory.
> 
> Contrast that with 200 gigawatts of wind installation this year. Wind continues to far surpass solar power due to lower costs.



Old Crock, you link states the opposite, besides, why destroy millions of acres of land for extremely expensive energy, the energy is so expensive we have to borrow billions from the Chinese so we can buy the solar components from the Chinese. You can bet your ass that the Chinese are following all our environmental laws. 

Maybe that is why all the Green Energy is made in China, so we can pollute the earth where we cant see it. 

Solar makes people feel good, its not renewable, Solar power plants do not last as long as a fossil fuel plant, we will literally have to throw thousands of square miles of solar panels in the garbage before on nuclear reactor needs to be replaced.

Windmills and Solar panels get replaced more ofter than a nuclear power plant so how is that renewable?


----------



## mdn2000

Old Rocks said:


> *By damn, solar seems to be flopping a lot to be considered dead.*
> 
> 5 GigaWatt Solar Power Field To Be Built In South Africa | Solar Power
> 
> South Africa has recently unveiled plans for building worlds biggest solar energy park, which, according to officials, will be capable of producing about 5GW of clean electricity.
> 
> The country is more than 90% dependent on coal-fired power stations and one in six people still lacks electricity: In South Africa over 90% of our power comes from the burning of coal and we need to reduce this because of our international obligations on climate change, said Jonathan de Vries, the project manager



Good place for large solar power plants, its not like elephants need a place to roam. How hot will the earth get with every solar power mirror to be the largest in the world, seems like all those mirrors will reflect the heat back up into that very scary CO2 (dry ice is CO2).

Mirrors get real hot, I thought we were suppose to cool the earth not cover it with mirrors reflecting the heat back into the atmosphere heating up those pesky CO2 molecules. I wonder how much heat the earth used to absorb but now is reflected into the atmosphere. 

Seeing how global warming is all theory I have a new theory, as Solar power plants are built the earth gets warmer. Solar Power plants reflect heat into the atmosphere where the heat causes the most damage.


----------



## Bfgrn

Solar energy is dead 

It's just is an eclipse...stay calm...


----------



## mdn2000

Bfgrn said:


> Solar energy is dead
> 
> It's just is an eclipse...stay calm...



So we need nukes during an eclipse, solar energy fails during an eclipse. Maybe they can time the wind to blow during the eclipse or maybe they think we cant have an eclipse with no wind. 

I bet you Old Crock knows the answer, Old Crock knows everything. Just check the link.


----------



## Bfgrn

mdn2000 said:


> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Solar energy is dead
> 
> It's just is an eclipse...stay calm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So we need nukes during an eclipse, solar energy fails during an eclipse. Maybe they can time the wind to blow during the eclipse or maybe they think we cant have an eclipse with no wind.
> 
> I bet you Old Crock knows the answer, Old Crock knows everything. Just check the link.
Click to expand...


Here's your word for the day: Parody


----------



## mdn2000

Bfgrn said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bfgrn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Solar energy is dead
> 
> It's just is an eclipse...stay calm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So we need nukes during an eclipse, solar energy fails during an eclipse. Maybe they can time the wind to blow during the eclipse or maybe they think we cant have an eclipse with no wind.
> 
> I bet you Old Crock knows the answer, Old Crock knows everything. Just check the link.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's your word for the day: Parody
Click to expand...


If only the sun was shining, in circumstances such as these only fossil and nuclear energy are reliable, life saving.


----------



## Old Rocks

LOL. It just cannot get any better than mdn.


----------



## Secularist

Solar Energy and Biofuel are the future. About 2yrs from now, when the rightwing gets removed from office again. It really is unfortunate, that the conservatives, talking about what to do to stimulate the economy, do not embrace the idea of solar technology, biofuel, and other environmentally friendly energy sources. With all their abilities, well demonstrated, on how to make a profit, one would think they would be opportunistic in exploiting the potential of this green energy philosophy. It could be a win/win scenario.


----------



## JiggsCasey

Secularist said:


> Solar Energy and Biofuel are the future. About 2yrs from now, when the rightwing gets removed from office again. It really is unfortunate, that the conservatives, talking about what to do to stimulate the economy, do not embrace the idea of solar technology, biofuel, and other environmentally friendly energy sources. With all their abilities, well demonstrated, on how to make a profit, one would think they would be opportunistic in exploiting the potential of this green energy philosophy. It could be a win/win scenario.



In the greatest irony, conservatives are utterly uninterested in _*conserving *_anything when it comes to mankind's greatest crisis: energy.


----------



## mdn2000

Secularist said:


> Solar Energy and Biofuel are the future. About 2yrs from now, when the rightwing gets removed from office again. It really is unfortunate, that the conservatives, talking about what to do to stimulate the economy, do not embrace the idea of solar technology, biofuel, and other environmentally friendly energy sources. With all their abilities, well demonstrated, on how to make a profit, one would think they would be opportunistic in exploiting the potential of this green energy philosophy. It could be a win/win scenario.



You do not know a thing of which you post, do you. Its obvious you have done no research and have no education on the subject otherwise you could address what I have posted.

Wait for my next thread, I think it will be called, England to destroy destroy rain forest in south america to grow feedstock for biofuel.

Biofuels release more C02 in the atmosphere than burning oil and you need much more. 

A million acres on average 180 ft deep, that is how big some of the oil deposits are. 

How thick can you grow anything, squeeze it down and size, refine it, without links common sense must tell you at best you will have 1' of feedstock, once processed, we will need at least a 100 million acres of land devoted to growing crops for biofuel. Thats just to replace Saudi Arabia, which only provides around 20% of our oil, so we will need at lease 500 million acres of land.

Solar, maybe 500 million acres of land devoted to Solar.

Sounds like with all that land taken out of the hands of the public the price of land will go up, banks will make more money, Chevron, Exxon and all the other corporations are going to make a fortune.

I even heard we will have to cover Africa with biofuel crops, destroy the habitat for the elephants and gorillas, they are also cutting down the rain forest, but thats to meet Britain's demand.

Yes, the far right conservatives are the nut jobs with crazy ideas.


----------



## editec

Solar energy is dead?

Somebody better tell American farmers.

They're rather heavily invested in its continuing to be alive.


----------



## mdn2000

JiggsCasey said:


> Secularist said:
> 
> 
> 
> Solar Energy and Biofuel are the future. About 2yrs from now, when the rightwing gets removed from office again. It really is unfortunate, that the conservatives, talking about what to do to stimulate the economy, do not embrace the idea of solar technology, biofuel, and other environmentally friendly energy sources. With all their abilities, well demonstrated, on how to make a profit, one would think they would be opportunistic in exploiting the potential of this green energy philosophy. It could be a win/win scenario.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the greatest irony, conservatives are utterly uninterested in _*conserving *_anything when it comes to mankind's greatest crisis: energy.
Click to expand...


In the greatest irony of the world, you do not see the worlds largest solar farm consuming the worlds largest amount of glass to make the worlds largest mirrors, consuming the worlds largest amount land, making the worlds largest heat concentrator, open to the atmosphere. 

Irony, consuming more to create the worlds largest solar farm with the lowest return of energy.


----------



## mdn2000

editec said:


> Solar energy is dead?
> 
> Somebody better tell American farmers.
> 
> They're rather heavily invested in its continuing to be alive.



Somebody is buying their land to build the worlds largest solar power plant which is the worlds largest concentrator of heat. Better hope there is no CO2 around to capture the man all that dangerous man-made heat.


----------



## Old Rocks

We made the sun? Dang, I didn't know that. mdn, you silly ass, you just keep getting further and further out in right field.


----------



## JBeukema

Big Fitz said:


> Industrial scale solar is dead for another 40-75 years.  Till the technology is improved to greater efficiency to compete with real power sources like Nuclear, Hydro and Coal.
> 
> You will never know for true how good it really is till they lose all subsidies.
> 
> BUT...
> 
> As a supplemental power supply for residential and light commercial and possibly light industrial (offices with small machinery) it's a great bonus to have.  Slap those on the roofs of warehouses office buildings and houses, and it's a nice supplement.


Well said


----------



## JBeukema

Teh solar- it est too much!


Solar power could crash Germany's grid - environment - 27 October 2010 - New Scientist


----------



## JBeukema

JiggsCasey said:


> Now be honest and tell the forum how much water is used for oil shale and tar sands. It dwarfs the amount alleged in your faux concern above, OP.
> 
> Just what IS with the boner you guys have for ever-dirtier hydro-carbon energy? You'll learn soon enough just what's at play here.
> 
> Shhhh
> 
> ASPO-USA: Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas


they're republican puppets

big oil gives the Party a lot of money


----------



## JBeukema

JBeukema said:


> as to how long our available supplies of nuclear  fuel (located in the US) would last if we used it as our main or  primary source of power?




Never got an answer


----------



## JBeukema

What we need is a decentralized system in which every home and  businesses or city, as is feasible in any given case, using the means available to them- be they solar,  wind,geothermal, or some other means of production- seeks to generate  all the power they need. In times of high demand, or if their own  production is insufficient to fit their needs, they should draw power  from a smaller grid comprised of other homes and building in their area  and also shared sources of production- wind farms, solar farms, nuclear  or coal plants. Each of these micro-grids should then be connected to  one another through a hierarchal system, where each tier can operate independently of those next to or above it. Our aging infrastructure,  currently our lifeline, should then be converted to transmit power as  needed between the largest sets of these 'microgrids'.

Such a system would help isolate people from rolling blackouts, reduce  the vulnerability of America's power supplies, and improve overall efficiency, while the investment in producing one's own power would help  to save money and greatly reduce power bills in the future.

It falls to every homeowner to decide to lead this effort in their own  home, beginning by adding to or retrofitting their homes with wind or  solar power to the extent they can. It falls to congress and state leadership  to put into effect tax breaks for such investments to help encourage  such progress and to push for the adoption and development of such a  system, in their towns, cities, counties, and states. This is a system  that would have to be built from the bottom-up-- not by big daddy fed,  but by homeowners, local businesses, and cites and other local bodies.  The fed and the massive power supergiants should not be the vulnerable  backbone of America. They should work together to strengthen systems  that should be able to survive alone, generate their own power and  revenue, and encourage good ol' American ingenuity, drive, and  technological innovation.


----------



## JBeukema

mdn2000 said:


> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention that while it doesn't rain much in the mojave, it does rain, and that rain water can be captured and used to run the process.
> 
> With only 6 inches of annual rain each acre of solar farm has available 163,000 gallons of water annually that is easily collectible. Just gutters and pipes or the same kind of systems used to divert storm discharges in ordinary cities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the Solar power plants have not thought of this, too bad they dont read the message boards. I am against things that steal billions of dollars and drive up the cost of electricity so am not going to tell them about your post.
> 
> Solar power will remain dead.
> 
> How many total acres of delicate desert habitat are you advocating the destruction of.
Click to expand...



Have you seen the desert in souther arizona?

Digging up sand isn't destroying anything anyone gives a damn about


----------



## JBeukema

edthecynic said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention that while it doesn't rain much in the mojave, it does rain, and that rain water can be captured and used to run the process.
> 
> With only 6 inches of annual rain each acre of solar farm has available 163,000 gallons of water annually that is easily collectible. Just gutters and pipes or the same kind of systems used to divert storm discharges in ordinary cities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the Solar power plants have not thought of this, too bad they dont read the message boards. I am against things that steal billions of dollars and drive up the cost of electricity so am not going to tell them about your post.
> 
> Solar power will remain dead.
> 
> *How many total acres of delicate desert habitat are you advocating the destruction of.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cactus Hugger
Click to expand...


----------



## JBeukema

mdn2000 said:


> I guess I presumed what I consider simple knowledge, common knowledge, know to all or most here, so I apologize if I was curt, to put it mildly. I should of offered more information, better now, then never.
> 
> So here goes.
> 
> Solar is put in the desert where it is real hot in the summer, very dry which means little water.



1)Not all deserts are hot

2)heat does not mean dryness. Ever heard of a jungle?





> A desert is also full of rock, sand, dirt, deposits of minerals, open mines of minerals, minerals on the ground. Everything is real dirty, it is kind of like the desert is made of sand, hundreds and hundreds of miles of sand and rock, and dirt, minerals, even plants and the dust from plants that die.



And yet, while my roof and windows get dusty, they don't get buried


----------



## Old Rocks

JBeukema said:


> What we need is a decentralized system in which every home and  businesses or city, as is feasible in any given case, using the means available to them- be they solar,  wind,geothermal, or some other means of production- seeks to generate  all the power they need. In times of high demand, or if their own  production is insufficient to fit their needs, they should draw power  from a smaller grid comprised of other homes and building in their area  and also shared sources of production- wind farms, solar farms, nuclear  or coal plants. Each of these micro-grids should then be connected to  one another through a hierarchal system, where each tier can operate independently of those next to or above it. Our aging infrastructure,  currently our lifeline, should then be converted to transmit power as  needed between the largest sets of these 'microgrids'.
> 
> Such a system would help isolate people from rolling blackouts, reduce  the vulnerability of America's power supplies, and improve overall efficiency, while the investment in producing one's own power would help  to save money and greatly reduce power bills in the future.
> 
> It falls to every homeowner to decide to lead this effort in their own  home, beginning by adding to or retrofitting their homes with wind or  solar power to the extent they can. It falls to congress and state leadership  to put into effect tax breaks for such investments to help encourage  such progress and to push for the adoption and development of such a  system, in their towns, cities, counties, and states. This is a system  that would have to be built from the bottom-up-- not by big daddy fed,  but by homeowners, local businesses, and cites and other local bodies.  The fed and the massive power supergiants should not be the vulnerable  backbone of America. They should work together to strengthen systems  that should be able to survive alone, generate their own power and  revenue, and encourage good ol' American ingenuity, drive, and  technological innovation.



This has been my point for years. It is called a distributed grid. Now the Fed has a part, as you have pointed out, by creating tax incentatives to do this. Oregon has been doing this for years, and just increased the amount of kw's you have to be adding in order to get the same tax break as before. The reason being that solar and home wind have both came down considerably in price since the law was put into affect. Even the utilities have gotten into the act as they have began to realize that it would be to their benefit to have more power on line in the daylight hours when there is the most need of that power by industry.


----------



## mdn2000

JBeukema said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention that while it doesn't rain much in the mojave, it does rain, and that rain water can be captured and used to run the process.
> 
> With only 6 inches of annual rain each acre of solar farm has available 163,000 gallons of water annually that is easily collectible. Just gutters and pipes or the same kind of systems used to divert storm discharges in ordinary cities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the Solar power plants have not thought of this, too bad they dont read the message boards. I am against things that steal billions of dollars and drive up the cost of electricity so am not going to tell them about your post.
> 
> Solar power will remain dead.
> 
> How many total acres of delicate desert habitat are you advocating the destruction of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Have you seen the desert in souther arizona?
> 
> Digging up sand isn't destroying anything anyone gives a damn about
Click to expand...


Goodyear, Buckeye, Wintersburg road, near Palo Verde Nuclear Generating station.

Yes I have seen it. Have you seen the Sequoia's, the bats, the coyote. How about the Desert Turtle.

I just spent ten days in Arizona, I go to Arizona every year on business, Sometimes I stay as long as three months. I can say I have spent a good two years of my life in Arizona. 

Arizona Top 10 Cash Crops - NORML



> Rank	Crop	Unit	Planted Area
> (000) Acres	Harvested Area
> (000) Acres	Yield Per Acre	Production
> (000) Units	1997 Street Price Per Unit
> Dollars	Value of Production
> (000) Dollars
> 1	Cotton, Upland	Lb	320	319	1,234.00	393,600	$0.673	$264,893
> 2	Hay, All	Ton	N/A	220	7.45	1,640	$111.000	$182,040
> 3	Marijuana	Lb	N/A	N/A	N/A	35	$2,976.000	$105,160
> 4	Wheat, All	Bu	100	98	89.5	8,775	$4.700	$41,243
> 5	Lemons	Box	N/A	13.9	187	2,600	$10.880	$28,288
> 6	Corn for Grain	Bu	70	50	170	8,500	$3.300	$28,050
> 7	Apples, All Commercial	Lb	N/A	4	11,300.00	45,000	$0.553	$24,885
> 8	Pecans	Lb	N/A	N/A	N/A	17,500	$1.250	$21,875
> 9	Barley	Bu	70	67	102	6,834	$3.050	$20,844
> 10	Cotton, Amer-Pima	Lb	22	22	982	21,600	$0.901	$19,462



100% destruction of all natural forms of life, 10 square miles of life gone, for one Solar Power farm. The return is a trickle of electricity, depletion of local water sources, massive use of energy to manufacture the Solar Panels.


----------



## JBeukema

That's a tortoise, not a turtle.



> I just spent ten days in Arizona, I go to Arizona every year on  business, Sometimes I stay as long as three months. I can say I have  spent a good two years of my life in Arizona.


I was born and have spent near my whole life in Southern Arizona. Trust me, we've got plenty of stretches of sand nobody will miss.


----------



## mdn2000

JBeukema said:


> That's a tortoise, not a turtle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just spent ten days in Arizona, I go to Arizona every year on  business, Sometimes I stay as long as three months. I can say I have  spent a good two years of my life in Arizona.
> 
> 
> 
> I was born and have spent near my whole life in Southern Arizona. Trust me, we've got plenty of stretches of sand nobody will miss.
Click to expand...


I am not aware of the difference, further turtle is easier to spell. I tried and was so far off the spell checker gave me screwed up alternatives.


----------



## mdn2000

I will miss the sand, I love the desert. Further, all those damn mirrors just reflect heat up into the atmosphere super-heating CO2.

Every solution to global warming destroys the earth.


----------



## Old Rocks

Large Solar Energy Projects

Excellant


----------



## mdn2000

JBeukema said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> loosecannon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention that while it doesn't rain much in the mojave, it does rain, and that rain water can be captured and used to run the process.
> 
> With only 6 inches of annual rain each acre of solar farm has available 163,000 gallons of water annually that is easily collectible. Just gutters and pipes or the same kind of systems used to divert storm discharges in ordinary cities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the Solar power plants have not thought of this, too bad they dont read the message boards. I am against things that steal billions of dollars and drive up the cost of electricity so am not going to tell them about your post.
> 
> Solar power will remain dead.
> 
> How many total acres of delicate desert habitat are you advocating the destruction of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Have you seen the desert in souther arizona?
> 
> Digging up sand isn't destroying anything anyone gives a damn about
Click to expand...


I care about the sand, 

see how easy your proved wrong. 

Maybe you can respond with a bit more intelligence next time.


----------



## mdn2000

Old Rocks said:


> Large Solar Energy Projects
> 
> Excellant



So, all your prove is you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground, should I did up your post where you stated that solar was profitable, that solar did not need to be mandated by law, and subsidized. 

Nice, thanks for showing us how Old Crock always will post something that contradicts a previous Old Crock statement.


----------



## Old Rocks

PGE Solar Rooftop Project in Portland | Solar Panels - Green Power

A new PGE solar rooftop project in Portland, Oregon will be the largest rooftop solar installation in the Pacific Northwest.  PGE (Portland General Electric) is planning a 2.4 megawatt (MW) solar project in partnership with U.S. Bank, ProLogis, and several other Oregon companies.  Northwest Solar Solutions estimates at least 60,000 green jobs (union wage electrical and roofing) will be created.

The project will be approximately 900,000-square feet in size and will cover the roofs of seven ProLogis warehouses in Portland and the neighboring cities of Gresham and Clackamas.  UNI-SOLAR thin-film solar panels will be installed, like the ones used in the 2008 solar panel partnership project between PGE and ProLogis.


----------



## Old Rocks

Solar Nation: Oregon Company Installs 42 KW Solar-Electric System on Appliance & Refrigeration Hospital Facility | Robert Gluck

Portland, Oregon-based Solar Nation announced the installation and commissioning of a 42kW solar-electric system on the Appliance & Refrigeration Hospital. 

The appliance service and repair center in Portland installed solar power to reduce and stabilize energy costs and to follow through on its long-standing commitment to protecting the environment.


----------



## Old Rocks

Cox Enterprises Completes Alternative Energy Project in Portland, Oregon - Oct 6, 2010

Cox Enterprises Completes Alternative Energy Project in Portland, Oregon
200kW Solar project produces green energy for Manheim Portland
PORTLAND, Ore., Oct. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- Cox Enterprises announced today that it has completed a solar power installation at its Manheim Portland facility on North Hayden Island Drive. The photovoltaic rooftop solar panel installation is 16,500 square feet and converts the sun's radiation to electricity.



"The Manheim Portland solar installation is closely tied to Cox Conserves, our national sustainability program," said Steve Bradley, director of alternate energy, engineering and business continuity for Cox Enterprises. "This is our tenth alternative energy project, and combined, the projects prevent 12,000 tons of greenhouse gases from entering the environment on an annual basis."



The installation generates 193 MWh of energy annually and provides more than 25 percent of the facility's electrical load requirement. By harnessing the sun's power, Cox helps the environment and reduces its energy costs.


----------



## mdn2000

JBeukema said:


> mdn2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I presumed what I consider simple knowledge, common knowledge, know to all or most here, so I apologize if I was curt, to put it mildly. I should of offered more information, better now, then never.
> 
> So here goes.
> 
> Solar is put in the desert where it is real hot in the summer, very dry which means little water.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1)Not all deserts are hot
> 
> 2)heat does not mean dryness. Ever heard of a jungle?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A desert is also full of rock, sand, dirt, deposits of minerals, open mines of minerals, minerals on the ground. Everything is real dirty, it is kind of like the desert is made of sand, hundreds and hundreds of miles of sand and rock, and dirt, minerals, even plants and the dust from plants that die.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And yet, while my roof and windows get dusty, they don't get buried
Click to expand...


1) The Mojave desert is not hot, please tell how, not asking for a link.

2) The Mojave desert is not dry. Link for this one.

I do work here on occasion


----------



## mdn2000

Old Rocks said:


> Cox Enterprises Completes Alternative Energy Project in Portland, Oregon - Oct 6, 2010
> 
> Cox Enterprises Completes Alternative Energy Project in Portland, Oregon
> 200kW Solar project produces green energy for Manheim Portland
> PORTLAND, Ore., Oct. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- Cox Enterprises announced today that it has completed a solar power installation at its Manheim Portland facility on North Hayden Island Drive. The photovoltaic rooftop solar panel installation is 16,500 square feet and converts the sun's radiation to electricity.
> 
> 
> 
> "The Manheim Portland solar installation is closely tied to Cox Conserves, our national sustainability program," said Steve Bradley, director of alternate energy, engineering and business continuity for Cox Enterprises. "This is our tenth alternative energy project, and combined, the projects prevent 12,000 tons of greenhouse gases from entering the environment on an annual basis."
> 
> 
> 
> The installation generates 193 MWh of energy annually and provides more than 25 percent of the facility's electrical load requirement. By harnessing the sun's power, Cox helps the environment and reduces its energy costs.



Now you get to pay more for your cable bill dumb ass. 193 MWh if the sun shines 100% of the time, at best you will get 20% of installed capacity. So we are speaking of 25 MWh a year, not enough energy to pump water to the roof to wash the panels once a year, of course the panels will be washed more frequently, given pumping water is one of the largest expenditures in any city that is one hidden subsidy to Cox, of course the only reason Cox did this was law, mandates, subsidies, grants, tax breaks, still the water issue, the energy used to pump that water to the top of the building is not bore by Cox, it may not seem like much but it is tremendous. What about the pollution from the energy used to pump extra water to Cox. Seems like we should save the water for better use.

Now lets look at the brand of Solar panels so we can see where they were built. Oregon has not offset CO2 with this tiny project, they just release the extra CO2 in the air elsewhere, where is that, where did Oregon emit this pollution. Was it China, I did not see the name of the Solar panels in the article. I want to know the city of where those panels were fabricated, the cities name of each place a component of these panels were made.

We need the names of the cities so we can understand how much pollution Oregon is hiding. They are not building these panels in Portland. 

What are the names of the cities. What is the name of the Solar panel


----------

